For all you so-called ‘moderate’ Democrats who can’t read poll results, I suggest you take a look at the Research 2000 poll results of the Massachusetts electorate. Take as long as you need to decipher the meaning in those numbers. And, when you’re done, stop dicking around and do the obvious.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
39 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
The “obvious” would be kicking the Senate insurance reform bill to the curb. Have the House pass Medicare For All(TM) effective immediately, kill the filibuster in the Senate and pass it with 50+1, if that’s all they can muster. Democrats go into the next election triumphantly pointing to the fact that they provided actual, real health care reform. Let millions of citizens experience affordable premiums for a year+ and then sit back and laugh while Repubs run on repealing this outrageous socialist expansion of government.
Yeah, I know that’s not going to happen…
How? How do they kill the filibuster? Boo says it can’t be done. I think it probably can, if Dems are willing to risk a hate campaign about how they’re “dictators”. But nobody seems to know what the options are. Believe me I’ve looked, and come to the conclusion that the Senate “rules” are just whatever the loudest asshole wants them to be.
For example: what would happen if the Rules Committee dictated that from now on cloture would be achieved with 51 votes, and the majority leader then held a vote and declared the vote won with a simple majority? What would happen? Politically we know the battle that would follow. Legally, as far as I can find, nobody has a clue.
The Senate itself weems to pretty much agree:
So somebody, at long last, tell me why we are letting questions of life, liberty, and happiness be decided on the basis of “rules” that the Senate itself confesses are nothing but illusions? Time to throw that script on the bonfire and start running this like a nation of grownups.
I asked this to a colleague of mine who knows the rules very well. He hasn’t gotten back to me yet.
I was wondering the same damn thing, Dave.
I was just rereading the quote I inserted above. How the hell does a nation that actually believes it’s the “world’s greatest democracy” read a description like that — from its own official documents — and still look in the mirror without puking?
I share your concerns about the power of the filibuster gone amok, but we have to be very careful about advocating for its repeal. Without the threat of the filibuster, I wonder what the Bush Administration might have been emboldened to do?
There’s an election in 2012 that might not go our way. Are we really ready to accept a President Palin/Pawlenty/Brown/etc without having the filibuster as a last resort to stop horrific legislation?
How many Bush bills were stopped by a filibuster? Few or none, as far as I can remember. Maybe someone else can set me straight on that. Keep in mind that Bush launched us into an illegal invasion without even bothering with the Constitutional requirement of Senate consent.
Democracy is about standing up for the truth of things and taking the consequences. The scenario you envision — a wingnut president and wingnut controlled Congress — will happen precisely because the Dems let themselves be cowed by some nonexistent “rules” that no citizen ever ratified at a ballot box. We get neo-fascists because Dems dither, not because they fight dirty for the good of the American people.
I think you’ve stumbled on a Rumsfeldian “known unknown.” My point, as I stated clearly, was about the power of the filibuster to deter certain bits of legislation even getting to the floor, hence the “threat of the filibuster.”
Am I, or “someone else,” able to tell you all the things that BushCo might have attempted or done if the rules governing the operation of the legislative branch were different? Unfortunately, no. And to reiterate, I share your frustrations and concerns.
What’s important to me, regarding the filibuster, is that we not shoot ourselves in the foot. This “democratic dithering” is a nice lift from right wing talking points. The irony that you advocate “fighting dirty,” when that was a big part of what was so wrong about BushCo, is not lost on me. Fighting hard is one thing, something the Dems need to do more. Fighting smarter seems to be imperative, as well. But “fighting dirty” implies the quasi-fascist tactics that BushCo employed. If you have a real problem with fascism, I would expect you’d oppose it regardless of who employs those tactics.
Perhaps I’ve misinterpreted you, I know you’ll feel free to correct me.
To me, fascism comes closer to automatic rule by a small minority than to a majority using the power the Constitution gave it. Did you read the quote from the Senate’s own website? Voters never sanctioned the insider “rules” that are now used to prevent the change that voters thought they were enabling. They are not law. Bushco’s evil sprang from its goals and its flouting of actual law. The Senate “rules” are not law and are entitled to only as much respect as they merit by their results.
What some future GOP troika might or might not do is a concern for another day.
Pretty sure Bush’s big tax cuts were passed by 50 senators plus one foul-mouthed asshole.
One of the things that the Research 2000 poll results shows is that Democrats need to stop reinforcing Republican memes that the Democrats can’t get anything done. Actually quite a lot has been done in the last year, unfortunately one of those accomplishments has not been health care, but there have been a lot of changes.
This may be longer than you would like but I hope that you will not cut it because we need to emphasize the positive things that have happened and are happening.
Here are some things that you can let people know that has been accomplished:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/signed-legislation
Featured Legislation
Signed on October 30, 2009
Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act of 2009
——————————————————————————–
Signed on October 28, 2009
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
——————————————————————————–
Signed on October 22, 2009
Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on August 06, 2009
Cash For Clunkers Extension
——————————————————————————–
Signed on June 22, 2009
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on May 22, 2009
Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009
——————————————————————————–
Signed on May 22, 2009
Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on May 20, 2009
Helping Families Save Their Homes Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on May 20, 2009
Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on April 21, 2009
Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act
Signed on March 30, 2009
Omnibus Public Lands Management Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on March 20, 2009
Small Business Act Temporary Extension
——————————————————————————–
Signed on February 17, 2009
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on February 11, 2009
DTV Delay Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on February 04, 2009
Children’s Health Insurance Reauthorization Act
——————————————————————————–
Signed on January 29, 2009
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
==
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
==
And then there is this from PolitiFact. I think that this is pretty good considering the obstructionism of the Republicans and even some of the ‘conservative’ Democrats.
http://www.politifact.com/
Tracking Obama’s promises
91 Promise Kept
33 Compromise
15 Promise Broken
87 Stalled
275 In the Works
2 Not yet rated
Not too bad, wouldn’t you agree? In spite of the obstructionist Republicans, who are still stalling administration nominations!
Then, consider the good things that the Federal agencies are doing… Labor, FDA, EPA, Veteran’s Affairs, Transportation and many more.
Then there is this on ethics in the Obama administration:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/73645-obama-scores-well-for-first-year-on-ethics-say-watc
hdogs
I am not saying that you have to agree with everything that the Obama administration has done and is doing but surely some of the things I mentioned above you agree with?
Concentrate on the changes made, especially since the Republicans want the narrative to be that the Democrats can’t get anything done!!!
That is a great list. There is one problem. Sadly, none of that is stuff you can run a campaign on, like you can Medicare for All.
I didn’t mean it as something to run on, exactly. I bring these things up because there actually have been a lot of changes and that is opposite to the Republican meme. THAT needs to change. As long as everyone, Democrat & Republican just want to carp, it is not only unproductive, it is destructive.
The entire vibe needs to shift to be more positive. People either like all carping and complaining or they like at least a little dose of positive. Right now we are shutting out all of the people who need a little positive! They stop listening. This includes all of the people who do not pay as much attention as regular bloggers and their readers.
You can’t run on childrens’ health insurance? Or fair pay? Or heading off a Depression? You could if you weren’t a Democrat. But I agree, great healthcare reform would be a much easier sell.
Thanks for this list. As you say, there’s much more good going on in the federal agencies and by executive orders, as well. Enough for the Dems to hold them up in contrast to Bush and campaign to get even more done for the people. Yet they seem incapable of doing so.
Of course now that the moron majority in Massachusetts has spoken, everything Dems say and try to do will be spun as defensiveness rather than policy and passion. This could be the turning point that paves the way for more, not less, Dems in Congress. I wish I believed they’re up to the task.
I almost NEVER hear any of this brought up in any context! Isn’t there a way to advertise it at least a little without sounding defensive? Surely there is but I am probably not the one who can be diplomatic enough to come up with it. It seems like a professional diplomat could frame it as positive without seeming defensive!
Again, I just think that the meme MUST change. Unfortunately Democrats don’t seem to think that this is important and Republicans own the dialogue all the time! Democrats in congress just seem to think that the general public should be able to see why they are right and the Republicans are wrong, without ever explaining the facts to them.
As an example, I had a discussion with a sister-in-law before the 2008 election. She is married to a retired Airman and she was not aware that McCain seldom voted in favor of veteran’s benefits. The general public makes assumptions, they need the facts! I know… the facts are out there but most people don’t have the time or inclination to dig for them so they need to be mentioned as often as possible.
Offensive is a good way to accomplish not-defensive. I don’t think we need a diplomat — we need a frigging warrior at this point. Our goal should be to destroy the Republican Party, not show it “respect” and “deference”. It is simple truth to expose it as a cabal intent on destroying everything best in America.
But, again, as the Massachusetts moron majority demonstrated yet again, our collective memory goes back as far as Leno vs Conan, and our intellect is barely up to programming the DVR. What do you do with such a condition? Obama’s election seemed like a great awakening for a little while, but now appears to be just another little anomalous blip.
I am not talking about respect and/or deference. I am talking about framing.
And if you mean warrior like many of the Progressives on the radio, that won’t work. Even I can’t handle their screeching for very long. One of them on my local station has a really whiney voice to add to the screeching. I think that turns off Dems and Independents! Destructive, not constructive and to the general public it probably sounds just as crazy as the rabid right!
Ok, suggest some framing that would fit your ideas of how to change the meme.
The problem with the radio people you refer to is not that they’re warriors, it’s that they’re yappers and screechers. And whiners. We don’t need no stinkin framing. We need to fight all-out for what Americans want and need, with intelligence and passion, and no holds barred. We need to forget the “one nation” that never did and never will exist and battle for the greatest good for the greatest number, without compromise for the corporate/military interests. The rest will follow.
“We need to fight all-out for what Americans want and need, with intelligence and passion, and no holds barred.”
Ok, so give me some examples of how you would ‘fight all-out’ without sounding like a whiner, screecher, or yapper? I think that that is what the whiners, screechers, yappers think that they are doing.
Maybe you have expounded on this in other writing? Link?
You’d sound like Obama the campaigner did. And you’d apply that same intelligence and passion to the policy that makes the vision a reality. Example: “We’re working our asses off to stop the insurance companies from dropping you when you get sick. Not a single Republican wants that to happen, but we’re going to pull out all the stops use every ounce of the power you gave us, to get it done anyway.”
The screechers et al are annoying because they (we) keep getting bogged down in the tactics and forgetting what we’re trying to get done. We bitch about Congress taking a year nattering about HCR, but what’s leftblogistan been doing but spending a year nattering about Medicare for All vs PO vs whatever instead of making the case for universal healthcare accessible by everybody? Our side is as immersed in self promotion and narrow egotism as the other side. Seeing that yet again has been a hard pill to swallow.
Thanks. I am with you. In fact a week or so ago I saw a video of Pres. Obama addressing a group at the White House. I don’t remember who it was but he said “Good Morning” in his ‘campaign’ tone as opposed to a ‘let’s make this announcement and get on to other things tone’. It did catch my attention and I even said out loud… Oh, the campaigner is back. Campaign tone, enthusiasm and confident body language while explaining what he is doing and why would be go a long way.
I pointed that out to you twice the other day, in comments to your post BooMan, and you completely walked around that point twice.
The public option is more popular than almost all of the politicians out there. That is the default moderate position. Even Medicare for All is more popular than the plummeting politician’s numbers.
You write a lot of really good things, BooMan, stuff that I and many follow because it is usually well ahead of the curve…
I know this is verboten around here, but has anyone looked at the polling FDL has done? Specifically as relates to the Public Option? Even a lot of Republican voters think it’s a good idea.
Medical marijuana is polling at 81% support. Yes the public wants it, but how do you get the members of Congress to get behind it?
I wish I knew .. because it means they are corrupt .. cowards .. or both
That’s just it, though. We can cry all day about the polls, but the buck eventually stops at the Congressmen and what the President/leadership has to offer them for their support.
I personally don’t know where or how we move forward from here, but without the 60-vote mandate, Obama now has nothing to lose but fighting as hard as he can, rather than making deals on the inside to ensure passage–or as Ezra Klein called it today, his insider’s game.
I’m not much for this kind of crap, but a lot on the left are, as is the public. I like results, and if it takes back room deals to accomplish it–or it gives you a better chance at accomplishing it–I say go for the back room deals. Political poison, maybe, but it gets things done, and that’s what’s important.
This is now over, and without 60 votes, Obama has nothing to lose but be very open about everything he does and everything that’s going on.
I’m not sure that he gets it yet, I keep hearing mixed signals. On one hand I’m hearing more bullshit about bipartisanship and possible weakening of the bill, and on the other I hear him saying he needs to articulate to the public WHY he’s doing what he is doing better, and to fight harder.
I’m not sure which side wins out, but I’m hoping the fire is released at last.
I have found, over the years, that nothing is “verboten” over here as long as you try to keep it pretty darn civil and don’t try and fight the general leftward goals of the place. (Unless there were a bunch of rule changes I missed?) Though, I would not suggest trying to post something that is better suited to Red State or a freeper mindset… lol
The poll numbers all over the place, not just at FDL, have been making this point for a while.
But the overall problem is not just the public option. It is just one measurable and easily demonstrable thing because of the many polls on it compared to the many candidate polls.
Jobs and unending unregulated bailouts would rank slightly higher in importance. And they are both things that Dems have half-assed, IMHO, in their caving to the right wing.
BTW: Single Payer even has a place in the conservative movement. As unreal as that idea may seem? Some of them recognize the fact that paying the little bit in taxes for that will save them hundreds of dollars in their own pockets.
FIREDOGLAKE IS BAD!!!!!!!!
so there’s no need to read their polls or even pay any attention to them. also, Michael Moore is fat, so there.
/snark.
Polls sometimes mean something, sometimes not. Issue polls are generally a reflection of how the question is asked. For politics, the question is, is the issue one that will translate into votes, or is it just an opinion of the moment? Will it stay steady in the face of attacks from the wingnut/”centrist” media machine? Or more basically, will voting for the PO or for medical marijuana, for example, buy me what I need to stay in office, or will it just turn the big money guns on me and leave me to fend for myself? In a nation where the “left” is nothing more than a pack of pathetic yappy little doggies, that becomes a central career decision point.
I’m not saying that justifies ignoring them, but it probably in part provides an answer to your question from the viewpoint of a pol.
“In a nation where the “left” is nothing more than a pack of pathetic yappy little doggies”
Good one! I agree!
There are too many polls to pick and choose from, and enough of them are pretty specific in their wording. It is a big issue. Dem politicians had better start to deal with it or they will be gone.
There is nothing the base can do to help them on this stuff beyond telling them the truth over and over again… They have to start doing the right things on their own.
Running roughshod over the popular moderate ideas to cave in to unrealistic right wing answers will fail.
and the evolving meme from inside the beltway from the, so called, moderate democRATs and the kewl kids…aka: talking heads… is that coakley lost because congress has moved “too far to the left.”
if you think obama’s first year was a cluster fuck, hide and watch the next two. total gridlock, and still no leadership from the white house, just more of the same.
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/obama-senate-will-not-vote-on-health-care-before-br
own-is-seated.php?ref=fpa
Ouch.
Horrible News. You can really tell Obama’s lack of business experience in times like this one.
What a maroon! (quoted from Bugs Bunny)
can’t help but compare those poll numbers regarding public option with the ones regarding the mandate… i think a lot of people up there felt that the reform bill was going to be too much of a shit sandwich and not enough chaser.
So what does it mean now that they are waiting for Brown to be seated? How are they going to get their 60. Shame on this party and the leaders.
I think Obama made a calculation at the outset that he was going to try to push as much center-left change as the elite/corprate interests would support. He wasn’t going to fight them, he was going to bargain, but bargain hard with them. That was his approach and if you were paying attention to anything but campaign commercials he pretty much telegraphed that. I’m not sure if after getting the most “change” he could from the elite/corporate interests his play was to then swing for the fences, pivoting off the momentum of his “wins” or just try to keep with that playbook for 4-8 years.
Anyway, what’s clear from last night’s loss is that playbook is dead. It led to incrementalist/unpopular change, as in it didn’t deliver the goods to those who wanted change, and it left way too much political space to the republicans who were able to drop out of governing entirely and simply hone their message that Obama is a failure/socialist/moron (all while using every legislative trick they could to sabotage him).
The netroots are pretty unified on what Obama should do next, but i’ll spell out it again just to humor myself: stop bargaining with elites and entrenched interests and fight against them on behalf of working americans. Recociliation, rule changes and executive orders are just some of the tools at your disposal to actually deliver real change for real people when you’re the only party interested in governing.
And then its all about positioning for 2010- senate dems should pass a new set of rules for the US Senate to take effect for the next congressional term and should set up a number of votes to embarras republican incumbents and make them look like obstructionist and defenders of the establishment/fat cats. Put up loads of popular and populist legislation that current GOP members will have to think long and hard about voting against when they are up for reelection in November. Incumbents are going to fall this November and we need to go on offense as well.
To bring this back to your original post, the empirical evidence you cite above is really only relevant if you see the world the way the netroots do, which is that the role of the democrats is to fight for the positions popular with the public, to fight for the working and middle class. OBama and his close advisers say that’s great, we can read opinion polls too, but to govern those polls don’t matter so much as the institutional obstacles that the elite and entrenched interests have at their disposal to fight any change that hurts them and benefits someone else. Obama and Rahm tried for a year to use the fact that they are the only thing in between the elites and the populism as leverage to strike deals that would nominally benefit people and clear away those institutional obstacles. Going back to my original point, Obama and Rahm can either double down on this approach or embrace populism.
call me an optimist, but I think Obama is going to become the fighter we always hoped he would be-although ironically, not by choice but because the Republicans are preventing him from being the
great mediator style president he always dreamed to be.
This poll vindicates everything that I have been saying here and at dkos since September. More here, because at dkos, the “Obama is Jesus Reincarnated” people keep HR’ing me. I have a sneaking suspicion that they are really White House sock puppets.
But then nobody listens to voices in the wilderness do they? Well, somebody did listen to John the Baptist, but look at how that turned out!