Showing posts with label Midterms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Midterms. Show all posts

Wednesday, 3 November 2010

Get Angrier

Last night, the Republicans appear to have won over 60 seats in the US House of Representatives, taking back majority control of that body, while at the same time picking up at least 6 seats in the Senate. Democrats will retain a majority in the Senate and were relieved to hold onto some critical seats there that looked like they would be hard to hold - most notably, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid held onto his seat in Nevada against all odds.

So... that was a pretty crappy night for us, really. No two ways about it. The defeat of (sorry Mom) batshit crazy non-Witch Christine O'Donnell in Delaware and baseball bat wielding loon Carl Paladino in New York by substantial double digits won't stop the so called Tea Party from tightening their stranglehold on the Republican party. They now own it. They've proved in this election cycle that they can take down in the primary any Republican who shows any hint of an interest in actually solving the nation's problems. Climate change doesn't exist, immigration should be punished (and screw the law abiding Latinos who get caught up their dragnet), the only acceptable way to even attempt to fix the economy is with more tax breaks for the rich. Welcome to the new rules.

Well I say screw that.

President Obama's going to make a speech pretty soon, and I'm sure that as usual his words will be wise, reasonable and right. But I wanted to post before he speaks to tell you that, from my point of view, election 2012 starts today.

I'm incredibly proud of the Democrats accomplishments of the past two year. Against resistance from every faction of the Republican party we've salvaged the economy, rescued the auto industry (which, amazingly, is now restored to full profitibility), delivered a stimulus package that economists agree is responsible for keeping or creating between 1.5 and 3.3 million jobs, and passed health care reform that will cover 95% of the population and will serve as our lasting legacy for generations to come.

It was the most successful Congress of the past hundred years, and seems to have started to but it wasn't enough - not nearly enough to solve the deep and lasting damage that has been done to the economy by 8 years of Republican mismanagement. And people angry. I don't blame them

The problem is that people have lashed out, in their anger, at the only people they could knowck down - the overwhelming Democratic majorities in Congress. We were in their sites, so they took us down.

I think the voters weren't nearly angry enough. I know I wasn't.

Republicans now say they want to spend the next two years obstructing, blocking, investigating and holding hearings on the Democrats. For instance,

The GOP plans to hold high profile hearings examining the alleged "scientific fraud" behind global warming, a sleeper issue in this election that motivated the base quite a bit.

Now that they have the reigns of power in the House, what are they hoping to accomplish with it? Well, nothing actually,

"If you put too much of the actual official power in the hands of the Republicans, it makes them responsible. Right now, I think they're in perfect position tactically. Control the House, object, propose stuff that Obama may veto and run on that against him in 2012.”
While the country has a 9.6% unemployment rate? Does this sound to you like a party that has any interest in, oh, I don't know, fixing things?

Me neither.

The 2012 election campaign starts RIGHT NOW. And I say, bring it on. This is a fight we have to win.

Wednesday, 22 April 2009

It's All Over Now, Baby Blue


I've just read a really interesting article on Politico about Obama's seeming imperviousness to cultural attacks from the right. Though I have this sneaking suspicion that the article is really looking for an excuse to dig up every single anti-Obama culture war argument they can find ("He bowed to the Saudi king! He ADMITS his middle name is Hussein! He's talking to... FRENCH people!") in the guise of analysing them, I think the underlying point of the article is basically true: no one gives a damn.

This has many causes, but first among equals, perhaps, is the general sense that the political center of gravity has shifted away from the Baby Boomer generation and therefore from its generational arguments - draft dodging hippies versus "silent majority" reactionaries. As in my previous post about Socialism, to many of us these types of arguments feel stale and irrelevant.

But the article also makes another point that I found trememdously inciteful (and encouraging):

And then there is the nature of Obama’s victory last year.

“He had a coalition where he didn’t have to figure out how to get socially conservative voters behind him,” noted Carrick, a South Carolina native who has helped his clients navigate the culture wars. “He won with younger voters, Latinos, African-Americans and college-educated suburban voters. Those folks, for different reasons, just don’t care about some of these issues.”


In other words, Obama didn't win in November just because he was able to persuade a sufficient number of actually-conservative voters that he wouldn't be too scarily progressive. He actually has a pretty respectable majority composed of people who WANT him to be at least somewhat progressive. Demographic changes in the country, plus the most successful Democratic get out the vote operation in History have made that possible for the first time in a long time.

Larry Sabato thinks this will be a re-aligning election - personally I'm not sure. We'll know in a couple of years whether we're heading in that direction, because a successful midterm election would make three in a row for the Democrats.

But I do think there are trends in our favor that go beyond just the Republican failure to get themselves organised. Although that is, it must be said, quite spectacular in its own right.

Update: And another thing! As Steve Benen at Washington Monthly points out and as I should have mentioned initially:

It also seems that Obama isn't taking any meaningful hits because his policy agenda is fairly close to the one he presented during the campaign. Martin questions, for example, why the president has gotten away with a more progressive policy towards Cuba. Maybe it's because he already told us he'd do exactly that?

Indeed, with a few notable exceptions, most of the President Obama's agenda is in line with Candidate Obama's agenda. He wants to raise taxes on the wealthy while cutting them for the middle class? He wants to reform the health care system? He wants a withdrawal timeline for U.S. troops in Iraq?

Perhaps the president "skates" on these issues -- all of which the right finds outrageous -- because it's what voters hired him to do.