Elusive Trope's picture

    Now is the Time

    By Elusive Trope on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 10:57am |

    As we continue to watch the unfolding debate regarding the budget, debt ceiling, and the deficit, it seems to me that it is pretty clear what is at stake in 2012.  Regardless of one's opinions about how liberal Obama is, or just how much difference there is between the Dems and the Repubs, one has to say now that the "tea party" faction has taken most of the control, a Republican-controlled Congress starting in 2013 would be disastrous, even with Obama still in the Oval Office.

    Larry Sabato and Kyle Kondik begin their assessment of the 2012 Senate Races this way over at Sabato's Crystal Ball:

    As we take a fresh look at next year’s Senate races, one thing is clear: Barring an unexpected reelection landslide by President Obama, Republicans are at least slightly favored to take the Senate. It’s just a basic matter of numbers.

    Their toss up races are all currently held by Democrats

    Missouri, Claire McCaskill

    Montana, Jon Tester

    Nebraska, Ben Nelson

    New Mexico, Jeff Bingaman retiring

    Virginia, Jim Webb retiring

    Wisconsin, Herb Kohl retiring

    I would like to believe that at least Massachusetts is a toss up, especially if someone like Warren runs against Brown. 

    Nebraska is probably toast, not that having Nelson return is much help for the liberal cause.  This is one case where it is probably just as well to have the person holding the Senate seat to have the R rather than giving the impression that the moderates and liberals have more power than they do.

    In places like New Mexico, Wisconsin, Montana and Virginia it is definitely a time for the progressives, liberals and liberal-leaning moderates to stand up and be counted.  To demonstrate that the liberal wing in this country can have as much power as the tea party. 

    This is Sabato and Kondik's take on Montana:

    Democrat Jon Tester’s victory over Republican Conrad Burns was one of the more unlikely keys to the Democrats’ capture of the Senate in 2006. Now, Tester faces a stern challenge from popular Rep. Denny Rehberg (R). Some on the left became disillusioned when Tester opposed the DREAM Act, designed to help immigrant children gain access to higher education. But Tester’s real problem is that Big Sky country is very likely to vote for the GOP presidential nominee by a wide margin—as long as Republicans nominate a mainstream candidate. A recent Public Policy Polling survey showed Tester with a decent 51% approval rating, and yet he trailed Rehberg 47%-45%. Still, Tester has populist appeal and Montanans know how to split tickets, so this should be one of the better Senate shows next year. Montana is a cheap media state, so both parties and every interest group known to man and woman will have TV ads playing here. Fortunately for them, Montanans spend a lot of time out of doors.

    Comments

    I had not seen this analysis and it scares the crap outta me.

    I truly do not want to live in the America the republicans envision. After all that has gone on the past 2 years, it seems like the electorate would reconsider their decision to give the house to the repubs, let alone rewarding them with the senate. But then, people often vote against their own self interest.

    Scary days.


    by stillidealistic on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 11:17am

    I just came across these guys analysis, and I'm not saying they're the creme of the crop. Just something to bounce off of, so to speak.  In their House analysis, they keep open the possibility of the Dems retaking control.  With the election so far out, it is impossible to say what will happen given the things that can and will occur between now and then.

    But it is scary - the economy gives the Repubs an advantage with the low information voters so it is possible we could see Congress and the White House in the hands of the Rs.  If the tea party faction gains anymore ground through this election, it will be tough days indeed.


    by Elusive Trope on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 11:36am

    In a sane world it would be astounding if a Republican won anywhere.  Instead, in Corporate America, with all that the Republicans have done to take down the classes with the most voters, there's a chance they'll win the senate.  Unbelievable.

    So what that should tell everyone who cares about keeping the Republicans out is that it's  downright destructive to the country when the defeat of Obama and the Democrats takes center stage. It gives the Republicans a clear path to the majority.  As much as we'd like to talk the strategies to death, it's time now to go after the Republicans.  It's gonna take all our energy just to squeak by with a majority in the senate.  That just shouldn't be.  There's plenty of ammunition if we just concentrate on using it.


    by Ramona on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 12:40pm

    But it isn't a sane world, and while the far-right is fired up about getting rid of Obama, if the far-left decides to sit it out, and we lose the senate, and possibly even the WH, I hate to see what the landscape will look like in 4 years.


    by stillidealistic on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 4:01pm

    Unfortunately, the far left isn't going to just sit it out.  They're going to do their best to get rid of Obama, right alongside the far right.  I want Dems who lean farther left just like everyone else, but these are perilous times, and there are devils out there waiting to whack us all.  Sometimes you gotta go with what you got.  (I hate saying that, but 2012 is looming large.  There just isn't time for great change right now.)


    by Ramona on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 4:59pm

    If the leaders of the Democratic Party continue to drift to the right and don't offer voters a clearer choice, they will dig their own grave.


    by Dan Kervick on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 8:18pm

    They won't have to.  They'll be getting a whole lot of help.


    by Ramona on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 10:58pm

    Based on the recent voter outcomes, the drift to the right would be expected.  If the voters had sent more Dems to DC in 2010, then people might believe that the people wanted the Dems to go further to the left. Instead, the House went to the Repubs and the Senate was barely held.  Now if you want to try to convince me that a voter put a tea party politician in power in an effort to convince DC to take the socialist route, go ahead and try.

    If you and others want DC to drift left, vote Democratic overwhelmingly, and even more so, vote progressive in the primary and have that progressive win the general election.


    by Elusive Trope on Tue, 07/19/2011 - 11:21pm

    Voters are populists.  There is no version of left populism available in the marketplace and so voters went with right populists.  But we can see already that there has been a backlash against the extremism of the right in the state budget battles that have taken place since 2010.  Still people are confused and disoriented by the absence of anything coming from the Obama camp that is a response to their frustrations.

     


    by Dan Kervick on Wed, 07/20/2011 - 2:27am

    If voters are strictly populists, then we're doomed.  We can only move forward when voters vote for the seventh generation.


    by Elusive Trope on Wed, 07/20/2011 - 2:46am

    I was listening to Diane Rehm the other day where she and guests were talking about the budget, I believe.

    One caller knocked my socks off. He was an evangelical from FL who had become a Republican because of the party's stance on religious issues.

    But he is now abandoning the party because he and his wife (a teacher) see that the Republican party stands only for the monied class (my words, but his thought).

    Here was a guy who is waking up to his own economic interests. I was stunned.

    An economic, left populism could work as long as it fought fervently for the middle and working class without becoming rigidly extreme as the baggers have done.


    by Peter Schwartz on Wed, 07/20/2011 - 12:02pm

    I always get a little concerned when I hear the term "populism" bantered about as a strategy.  The problem with populism is can't help but become a like a sports agent, always pushing for the best deal for his or her client.  While working families do need to get some serious support from the government, sometimes one has to say this group has to give a little in order for another less well off group to get a little.  In other words, once one goes down the path of populism I doubt one can avoid slipping into the rigid extremism we see with tea baggers (it is interesting to note that most tea baggers are all for their particular pet budget items not to be touched)


    by Elusive Trope on Wed, 07/20/2011 - 3:51pm

    I share what I think are your concerns.

    To me, populism often seems to bleed over into angry mob-ism...a storm of popular emotion that spreads quickly, but has no reason and fails to see the big picture.

    This may be because populist movements arise when "the people" feel they haven't been listened to and their concerns and needs haven't been addressed. And when their elected leaders act in ways that don't make sense and at least appear to be inimicable to "the people's" best interests. They feel pressed to the limit and are mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore.

    Once they get mad enough to march, it's hard to bring them back within the bounds of reason. So it's important for us to act before the pot starts boiling.

    But what struck me about this caller was that he should be smack dab in the middle of the Republican, Tea Party demographic. And yet, apparently, he had busted through all that to see what his real interests were. Who knows where he'll end up, but it was a fascinating call to listen to.

     


    by Peter Schwartz on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 11:26am

    There is buyer's remorse here in Florida, with the behavior of Rick Scott and his congress voters are growing weary.  The talk of cuts in programs that the retirees depend on is not helping.   


    by trkingmomoe on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 12:35am

    Maybe they'll get tired of West's threatening tirades, too. Guy has anger management problems, I fear.


    by Peter Schwartz on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 11:27am

    No version of left populism for the voters in November?  I can think of two right off the bat and I have no doubt there were plenty more.

    Russ Feingold for Senate (Incumbent)

    Virg Bernero for Governor (Michigan)

    Both of them fit the liberal/progressive bill perfectly.  Both of them lost.


    by Ramona on Fri, 07/22/2011 - 4:52pm

    See you never swore once and you won the day. hahahah

    Nelson is and was such a schmuck. hahaha I hate that guy but you throw his successor into the repub caucus and we are screwed.

    I mentioned this many times over the last three years. Oh but we have principals or principles or whatever. Well so have the teabaggers.

    Coalitions are fragile to say the least!

    The enemy of your enemy becomes the enemy of your enemy of your enemy and Richard III shows up. hahaha

    Oh well....


    by Richard Day on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 5:44pm

    I can't remember if it was King Richard or Senator Nelson that said:

    I shall despair. There is no creature loves me;
    And if I die, no soul shall pity me.
    Nay, wherefore should they? since that I myself
    Find in myself no pity to myself.


    by Elusive Trope on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 6:50pm

    Latest Comments