Stuart Rothenberg is certainly counting his chickens before they have come home to roost. This is something that timeless wisdom has told us not to do. Some people call it “irrational exuberance.” Maybe Rothenberg is correct and will be proven prescient, but I find this bandwagoning quite annoying.
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.
26 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
If he’s wrong, he won’t pay a price. Like any other media elite.
So he finishes up by saying:
Are the Democrats’ losses due to the increasingly partisan nature of our elections and the makeup of the past two Senate classes, or is the president at least partially to blame because he failed to show leadership on key issues and never successfully moved to the political center?
The answer, most obviously, is, “Yes.”
Well, yes to which of the questions? Because it sure as hell isn’t the second.
Obama’s fault?
A shipload of those Democrats in Congress have been running away from Obama’s policies and undercutting him in votes for six solid years. Some of them might be among the losses–going to real Republicans in their districts.
The national media has been transparently trying to suppress the Democratic vote for a month. Chuck Toddler’s disqualification of Allison Lundergran Grimes was only the most blatant and hamfisted attempt.
The national media have their narrative and by golly they are going to stick to it and force reality to obey.
If the numbers agree with Rothenberg’s forecast, his tone tells you that the Beltway crowd is wanting to take down another President.
Hopefully Democratic voters will disappoint all of them.
I think the devolution of DNC from the Dean era is absolutely Obama’s fault. And his no drama temperament is a huge liability politically though not in policy both for rank and file but especially pathetic congressional Dems. Otherwise no not his fault.
Not limited to the Beltway. But Democrats don’t want to hear that and will absolutely blame Obama for lost Senate seats. Completely ignoring the fact that Senate Dems aren’t using either the Obama or Dean playbook.
Some Senate Dems. Moral Monday forced Hagan into using a GOTV playbook.
Carter and Nunn in Georgia are trying to extend the playbook with their 50 additonal votes per precinct canvassing goal.
The DSCC invested heavily in more field staff for Senate campaigns this year. Whether that field staff knows what they are doing remains to be seen next Tuesday.
There are some interesting campaign experiments going on in the field. Some might work. Others might fail. But at least some candidates and their staffs are trying to figure out how to make the big money guys waste their money.
Was referencing the messaging playbook that candidates are using. They aren’t like those used in 2006, 2008, 2012. GOTV is easier when people want to vote for a candidate.
I’m curious, what campaign experiments do you have in mind? (I’m assuming AK, but others?
The Moral Monday Movement did generalized registration and GOTV activities without pushing any particular candidates but as it was an organized response of the NAACP, the religious left, and teachers unions and had particular policy objectives, those facts leaned away from Republicans. It started in NC, but was operating in SC, GA, and FL and possibly elsewhere.
The Georgia Democratic Party unity campaign did intensive canvassing and GOTV activities with a target of turning out 50 voters additional per precinct who voted in 2008 and 2012 and did not vote in 2010. In addition they added 400,000 registered voters to the rolls, 40,000-80,000 of them “lost” by the Secretary of State.
The Democratic Senate Campaign Committee put money into a bunch of states testing whether GOTV can offset a reduction in media expenditures. Called the Bannock Street Project, some of the key close races in the polls were part of this effort. If there are electoral surprises favorable to Dems out of this, expect more of a shift of party funds away from media that is helping the GOP. If it is a shellacking, the message from media is “There is no alternative to us.” and we all are in for a long bout of bad policy.
As if getting a nut like Ernst in the Senate something to be proud of.
Three days of canvassing left to turn that around.
All the Republicans challenging in the Senate races are nutso. The Democrats are all sane and have no personal corruption or moral/ethical lapses baggage. But they all thought it was better to run from Obama instead of wasting time pointing out how dreadful their opponents are. Back to the Future. (And I don’t mean the good one in 2006-2008.)
I’m seeing nothing but negative campaigning from Dems. Reps are starting to announce an agenda. Hopefully, their agenda will bury them. Of course, some are flat out lying. Former Tea party Congressman Dold is now running commercials saying he is bi-partisan, wants to solve gridlock, wants to fix our economy, supports gay rights … All total lies of course.
Has Rothenberg been reading Booman’s projections?
Maybe Rothenberg is correct and will be proven prescient, but I find this bandwagoning quite annoying.
Does the White House still have a bowling alley? If so, can we use him as one of the bowling pins?
Assuming the Republicans “win” the election, what is depressing for me is not so much the results of this election, as that it will only entrench the strategy of total opposition and flaming irresponsibility in government that Republicans embraced. They shut down the government, bragged about defaulting on the debt, got our credit rating downgraded, went on an absolute orgy of racist dog whistling and just open and rank racism, made it crystal clear that they despise and loath poor and working people etc. They did everything in their power to sabotage the economy and hurt average voters.
So yeah, party leaders might realize they have no path to an electoral majority in a presidential election. But so what? If they control the states, they get to run Kochacracies, they can obstruct progress nationally (and provide cover to neoliberalcon democrats), they can suppress the vote with impunity, they can let the Supreme Court sell off parts of the constitution to corporate interests. Why would they WANT to win the presidency? Presidenting is hard, especially when your base is crazy. Yeah, they might not get exactly the number and size of military adventures that they would prefer, but there’s obviously broad and deep consensus in the ruling class about the need for pointless bloodshed every 6-12 months, Israel can get 95 senators to vote for just about any resolution, we’ve got more drilling than ever, inequality is soaring, Wall Street is untouchable, guns are terribly easy to get, legal abortion has almost never been harder to get, plus they can blame the devastating consequences of their actions on the president and thrive in opposition. And being in opposition is better for ratings and fundraising. What stops this dynamic from continuing for decades? We elect democratic presidents that the Republicans will totally obstruct with impunity and then when no viable solutions are forthcoming they can demonize government and demagogue every issue. They win the midterms, all progress stops, the President looks weak and ineffective, elected Democrats run for the hills…why wouldn’t this be the pattern for the next 20 years?
The silver lining has to be that if the Republicans control both the House and the Senate, then they will completely own the inevitable failures of the 114th Congress. They won’t be able to blame Harry Reid anymore.
After all, progress has already stopped thanks to the House Republican majority, but too few voters understand the extent of Republican obstructionism. If the next two year are going to be an ongoing battle between Obama and the Republicans on the field of vetoes, the Republicans are not going to come out of that looking very good. I know they have the idea that they can pass popular legislation and dare the president to veto it, but there really isn’t anything popular that they want to do.
You mentioned abortion, for instance, which is one good example. Would a Republican Congress be able to stop itself from passing abortion restrictions? I doubt. Would Obama veto them? Hell yes. Would that hurt him or the Democrats? Hell no.
Or look at the Supreme Court. If there is a vacancy over the next two years, it’s safe to assume that the Republican Senate won’t confirm anyone that Obama would care to nominate. And that would be bad, yes, but look what happens in 2016. Now that vacant seat on the Supreme Court is an issue in the presidential election, and which side does that favor? And this gets back to abortion, too, because of course the right is going to be looking for someone who will repeal Roe v. Wade. This is the kind of thing that will make reluctant liberals much more eager to vote for Hillary Clinton, if she’s the nominee.
Meanwhile, the return of open racism is revolting and depressing, but it’s also a loser in the long term. You really can’t have an all white people strategy, because what you wind up with isn’t white people against everyone else, it’s white racist dickheads against everyone else. And meanwhile the white percentage of the population is declining, and younger white people are becoming less racist.
Mind you, climate change is going to kick our asses anyway, but there are at least reasons to hope for the demise of the conservative movement.
If this one lasts as long as the last one, I won’t be alive to see that day. But as the GOP is even crazier now and the oligarchs/corporatists are much greedier, they will trash/crash the economy much faster. So, perhaps white people will grow up and recognize who is their real enemy, and we won’t have to wait so long.
Just another sign of how terrified the TPGOP is that they are going to lose more races that they thought they had in the bag already. They have had to pour funds into states that they felt were sure wins for them. Now they are trying desperately to encourage their base. Even if they lose their base will claim “Democrats always cheat” see the judge the world by their own warped standards and conduct.
I’m in Georgia and occassionally, but not recently, my husband votes Republican. Indeed he says he’s an independent. Because of that we get Republican robo calls, and even today, we got a real live call from a young intern (who sounded AA to me) with the Georgia Republican Party. Asked me if I would answer a couple of questions, namely who was I supporting for Governor and Senator? I said I’d already voted and I voted for Carter and Nunn. He was simply gobsmacked and thanked me and hung up. Apparently he thought, at the very least, that he would be talking to a “lean” Republican household. Made my day, I tell you, particularly after 4 hours canvassing out in the crisp Fall air for Dems.
By the way, Nunn has 2 closing ads up that are positive and upbeat. There really is a choice this time. We shall see how it all turns out, won’t we?
While I would prefer that we have fewer political dynasties, would be heartened if Carter and Nunn win.
Yeah, well, Obama may have the worst midterms ever, but Abraham Lincoln lost seven states before he was even inaugurated. Now that’s a disaster.
And I think it’s relevant too, because if you look at the nature of the opposition to Obama, the only other president you can compare him to is Lincoln. Of course things got a little more out of control in the 1860s, but in both cases you had a substantial bloc that dedicated itself to total opposition before the new president even had a chance. Because obviously the slave states never would have seceded if Lincoln had successfully moved to the political center.
ICYMI
Greg Palast, Al Jazeera: Jim Crow Returns: Millions of minority voters are threatened by electoral purge
There is a search function to see if your name could be caged by this effort. My name is not a common name, but it could be caged by the loose rules this cross-checking was using.
Also, James O’Keefe hit a couple of polling places in NC looking for illegal voters. See digby for the results. The Raleigh News and Observer isn’t biting on this one it’s so bad. But one of the quick establishing shots was of my polling place even though none of the story was about it.
The NC GOP was tag-teaming him close enough to try to leverage it into legal action even before the election. Corrupt little racket these Gooper have going.
Nor is my uncommon Italian name. Nor is my daughter’s former married name (Russian) but her current married name is a variant spelling Irish name and it had 13 hits in the search function. BTW, she lives in Alabama not Georgia or North Carolina so you can see how huge this can get if you cover the whole South. Then when you consider the wider range of ethnic names in the Red states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Indiana…
Damn! I forgot to check such common black names as Washington and Jefferson. And just how many Carter’s are there in Georgia? Maybe the Gubernatorial candidate is going to be purged.
This supposedly is checking duplicate registrations across state lines.
The article says that it caged 6 to 7 million names from 27 states and that the sample provided Al Jazeera was heavy on names like Jefferson, Washington, Martinez, Garcia, Singh, and Patel.
We have a manager (black) named James Jefferson. I was surprised to see only six hits, but the point is my name (white) had zero hits on last name only.
Once one is registered it should be presumed correct and challengers should have to prove their case, not automatically be presumed right.