First, would you rather the Republicans filibuster the financial reforms bill or see them cave in?
Second, is it true that when it comes to immigration reform, nobody wins?
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.
Filibuster! A moment ALWAYS comes when Republicans are on a winning streak and progressives are at home cursing God or the universe asking, ‘what kind of God (or unseen force of fairness that’s supposed to guide the world) would let these bastards win?!”, then just like that they overplay their hand. They always do. This may just be that moment.
On immigration, I think it’s true that no one wins in the short run, but in the long run the GOP is the definite loser. Democrats have to figure out how to strategically string this out through the mid-terms to stir ungency among Latinos but avoid making them feel they are being played and at the same time preventing poor/working class white panic. The objective is to galvanize turn-out in heavily populated Latinos states without spurring panicked white voter turnout in mid-western states and conservative districts.
well, that’s much easier said than done. Isn’t it?
I never said it would be easy. And I certainly never said or will ever say that Democrats are capable of such political mastery.
that strategy is a little too cute, and dem “leaders” aren’t good enough at strategy to keep people from realizing they’re being played.
it is a very divisive issue but I’d rather see them do something rather than continuing to avoid deciding.
On the first, i would like to see the republicans filibuster, but only if the democrats bop them over the head with the vote repeatedly.
On the second, if Politico says “X is true” it’s better to place your wager on “Not-X is true”.
I’d like to see a filibuster, but only if the Dems accept some strong amendments that address “too big to fail”. So I guess it depends on the Dems, our perpetual slender reed.
Same with immigration, really. The Dems could get some populist support if they presented reform as a way to short-circuit employers’ ability to run sweatshop operations with undocumented workers. Point out that providing a path for new workers will raise wages for everybody. But that would be too “anti-business”, no doubt, when everybody knows it’s all about brown people trying to steal our $3/hr jobs, not about the ones who utilize them.
Honestly? I want them to cave. I want this thing passed, and passed in the strongest language possible. Another victory continues momentum. And that would mean one or two Republicans will maybe vote for it, or at least vote for debate (and ultimately cloture). Let’s hope the Dems hold together…
Immigration is going to be tough. It could split the GOP; they’re the ones with the schizo policies — on one hand, you have the tea-party extremists who want giant walls on the border and counter-intuitively, a gigantic round-em-up-and-deport-em of the millions of undocumented immigrants already here (impracticality of that not being in their mindset), because as far as they’re concerned, immigrants from Down There are the real cause of all their economic woes. And you have the business side of the GOP, who want those workers here, and prefer them to be a bit scared — because they work for cheap, can be intimidated, and won’t cause trouble like asking to join a union, and can be deported if they cause trouble. And frankly, we NEED them here, because they are a large part of the workforce, but tea-partiers don’t care about that.
It’s going to be nasty. The Dems need to be united on this; if they are, they can probably pull it off. But are they? Not sure on that point….
So. The hubby was reading the NYT magazine about Mike Allen and Politico. I thought,”Snooze-fest” and passed. But because my beloved has a higher tolerance for this, he waded through it. And my Lord, look what he found:
So that’s weird. Who gives differing birth dates or make up what his father did? Just say you don’t know if you don’t know.
But I rather suspect they did know:
Which kinda explains why he’s Dick Cheney’s fav pen pal.
I know that it isn’t always the case that “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” but given the um…perspective, if you will, of Politico, then I’m not wholly surprised.
And I’m sorry, but MUCH hay was made of President Obama’s “associations.” Goose, gander, and all of that. Let’s just say that if I was working for an establishment firm/paper/company/corporation and my Dad was the minister of information for Louis Farrakhan…come on now, I don’t even have to finish the statement, now do I?
In the wonderful world of my political daydreams (ponies for all!), the Republicans filibuster the financial reform bill repeatedly. The Democrats do not compromise…or even strengthen the bill on their own.
Ultimately the Republicans cave, the bill becomes law, and this fall the Democrats tie this issue around the Republicans’ necks like a millstone…and the Republicans sink (or at least win less than 30 House seats and 5 Senate seats).
As for immigration reform—in a two party system somebody wins and somebody loses. Overall and long-term, the Democrats as a whole win (see: California and Prop 187). Short-term, some individual Democrats lose…which given the current political climate, could swing the House to the Republicans for the next Congress.