Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Health Care, Progressives, Senate | Tags: Democrats, Congress, Joe Biden, Al Franken, Minnesota, Vice President, Judiciary, Amy Klobuchar, Senate Judiciary Committee, Senate Health Education Labor & Pensions Committee, Walter Mondale
Senator Al Franken (D-MN) was sworn in today as the 60th member of the Senate Democratic caucus.
Watch:
Sen. Franken was accompanied onto the Senate floor by Minnesota’s other Democratic Senator, Amy Klobuchar, as well as former Vice President Walter Mondale, also a Minnesotan.
He will now assume seats on the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Governors, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Al Franken, Democrats, Judiciary, Minnesota, Minnesota Supreme Court, Norm Coleman, Republicans, Tim Pawlenty
It’s been nearly 8 months since Election Day.
It’s been more than 6 months since Inauguration Day.
And, finally, Minnesota’s outstanding Senate race has been decided.
Minnesota’s Supreme Court has affirmed [PDF] that Al Franken is the duly-elected junior Senator from Minnesota, having garnered more votes than former Senator Norm Coleman.
Of course, Franken still needs a certificate of election signed by his state’s governor, Republican Tim Pawlenty. But Pawlenty said that he would abide by the Supreme Court’s decision:
Minnesota law does not allow the governor to sign an election certificate until the state court process is complete. And when it is, and they direct me to sign the certificate, I’m going to sign it. There’s not going to be any undue delay or the like. But I’m going to follow the direction of the courts in that regard and we’re going to be having a decision here in the coming weeks … I have to follow the law. If the Minnesota Supreme Court says, “You sign the certificate” — and there’s not an appeal or some other contrary direction from a federal court — you know, that’s my duty. I can’t just ignore that or say I don’t feel like following a directive from the Minnesota Supreme Court. That would not be the responsible thing to do.
[Emphasis mine]
There’s a chance that Coleman could appeal this decision to the federal judiciary, which may give Pawlenty room to once again put off signing a certificate.
But the Minnesota Supreme Court should be the final say in this case, and they have resoundingly affirmed that Al Franken is the junior Senator from Minnesota.
UPDATE: I should note that the decision was unanimous–the court ruled 5-0 in Franken’s favor.
Here’s the key part of the ruling:
For all of the foregoing reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court that Al Franken received the highest number of votes legally cast and is entitled under Minn. Stat. § 204C.40 (2008) to receive the certificate of election as United States Senator from the State of Minnesota.
UPDATE II: Norm Coleman just conceded; congratulations to Senator Al Franken!
Filed under: 2008 Election, 2010 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Media, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2010, Al Franken, Arlen Specter, Congress, Democrats, Minnesota, Norm Coleman, PA-SEN, Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania, Republicans, Washington Post

Welcome home, Arlen.
The Washington Post has it:
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter will switch his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat and announced today that he will run in 2010 as a Democrat, according to sources informed on the decision.
Specter’s decision would give Democrats a 60 seat filibuster proof majority in the Senate assuming Democrat Al Franken is eventually sworn in as the next Senator from Minnesota. (Former Sen. Norm Coleman is appealing Franken’s victory in the state Supreme Court.)
“I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary,” said Specter in a statement. “I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.”
[Emphasis mine]
This changes everything.
UPDATE: First, there’s the question of what Specter’s switch puts back on the table–since he doesn’t have to pander to the right wing of his party anymore, will he vote more liberally? Will it be easier for the Democrats to win him over on key votes now?
Second, this puts even greater pressure on Norm Coleman to step aside in Minnesota–Al Franken would give the Democrats a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority, thus making the resolution of MN’s Senate contest even more important.
Third, this throws the entire PA-SEN race into disarray. Will more Republicans join Pat Toomey in vying for the GOP nod? Will any Democrats challenge Specter in the Democratic primary?
If a Democrat challenges Specter from the left, could he be pressured to vote more liberally–like how Toomey’s challenge from the right pressured Specter to vote more conservatively?
We have no answers yet, but this is undeniably good news for the Democrats and bad news for the GOP. I wonder how small the Republicans’ tent can get–it’s already looking pretty tiny from where I’m standing.
UPDATE II: MSNBC is reporting that one of the conditions of Specter’s switch is that nobody is allowed to challenge him for the Democratic nomination. I’m not exactly happy about that, but I guess I’ll accept it.
And I want to remind everyone that Specter won’t be a party-line vote–in fact, I predict there will be a number of times he votes against the Democratic caucus, just as he voted against the GOP caucus. He won’t be a reliable 60th vote, but he will be a 60th vote, and that’s what matters.
UPDATE III: The entire conservative movement is currently having a sour grapes party; you can practically smell the vinegar from here.
Even though Specter’s switch puts the GOP’s Senate caucus at 40 members, the fewest they’ve had since January of 1979, they’re still pretending that Specter’s departure is a good thing.
Because sitting by and watching all the moderates abandon your party in droves has done wonders for the GOP since 2005, right?
UPDATE IV: Whether or not you think this is good news for the GOP depends on whether or not you think Pat Toomey can beat Arlen Specter.
Problem is, PA has been trending bluer for a long time. For instance, compare the results of the 2000 Senate election to the 2006 Senate election:
2000
Rick Santorum: 52.4%
Ron Klink: 45.5%
2006
Rick Santorum: 41.3%
Bob Casey: 58.6%
Or look at how many Congressional seats have changed hands in the past 4 years alone:
2005
GOP: 12
DEM: 7
2009
GOP: 8
DEM: 11
Or look at the popular vote shift between the 2004 and 2008 Presidential elections:
2004
Kerry: 51%
Bush: 48%
2008
Obama: 54%
McCain: 44%
No matter how you look at it, PA has been trending bluer in the past few years; it isn’t particularly fertile ground for Republicans, let alone far-right Republicans like Pat Toomey.
Plus, Specter has the advantage of being a longtime incumbent, is regarded as a well-respected Senate moderate, and his party switch is already being spun as him putting his beliefs ahead of partisanship.
Toomey won’t win. He might be more popular than Specter among Pennsylvania Republicans, but Pennsylvania Republicans haven’t been the majority in Pennsylvania for a good long time.
UPDATE V: More proof that PA has been getting more hostile toward Republicans:
1998
Arlen Specter: 61%
Bill Lloyd: 35%
2004
Arlen Specter: 52.6%
Joe Hoeffel: 42%
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Governors, Media, Polls, Progressives | Tags: 2008, Bobby Jindal, Budget, Democrats, Federal Spending, Gail Collins, Hypocrisy, Republicans, States, Stupidity, Taxes
Louisiana has gotten $130 billion in post-Katrina aid. How is it that the stars of the Republican austerity movement come from the states that suck up the most federal money? Taxpayers in New York send way more to Washington than they get back so more can go to places like Alaska and Louisiana. Which is fine, as long as we don’t have to hear their governors bragging about how the folks who elected them want to keep their tax money to themselves. Of course they do! That’s because they’re living off ours.
Here are the top ten states that receive the most federal tax money per every dollar they pay, color-coded by how they voted in the 2008 Presidential election:
- New Mexico
- Mississippi
- Alaska
- Louisiana
- West Virginia
- North Dakota
- Alabama
- South Dakota
- Kentucky
- Virginia
Here are the top ten states that receive the least federal tax money per every dollar they pay, color-coded by how they voted in the 2008 Presidential election:
- New Jersey
- Nevada
- Connecticut
- New Hampshire
- Minnesota
- Illinois
- Delaware
- California
- New York
- Colorado
[Source]
So, if we actually listened to Republicans and cut federal taxes, the Republican-voting red states would be hurt the most. Turns out that the GOP’s grandstanding on taxes is nothing more than hot air–they have no problem railing against high taxes while simultaneously taking tax dollars hand-over-fist from blue states.
Filed under: 2008 Election, 2010 Election, Conservatives, Governors, House, Senate | Tags: 110th Congress, 2008, 2010, Congress, Democrats, Jay Nixon, Kenny Hulshof, Matt Blunt, Missouri State Treasurer, Primaries, Republicans, Roy Blunt, Sarah Steelman, Tom DeLay
Former Missouri State Treasurer–and failed 2008 Gubernatorial candidate–Sarah Steelman will challenge former House Minority Whip Roy Blunt for MO’s open Senate seat in 2010:
“I’m in the process of laying the groundwork that I need to get done before making an official announcement,” Steelman told POLITICO. “I’m definitely strongly leaning towards doing this.”
[...]
In the interview, Steelman took some sharp jabs at Blunt, describing the seven-term congressman Blunt as being part of the “old-boys’ network” who has spent too much time in Washington.
“Roy Blunt is another white guy in a suit, and I think the public wants change,” Steelman said. “There’s a good old boys’ network out there that’s hard to penetrate… and it’s not always in the best interest of the party or for conservative principles.”
[...]
In an interview with the St. Louis-Dispatch, Blunt flatly said that “Steelman can’t win the primary.”
I smell a bruising primary fight.
Blunt is part of the failed GOP establishment–he was the interim Majority Leader after Tom DeLay’s resignation and served as the #2 Republican in the House during the 110th Congress. In addition, his son Matt served an unremarkable term as Missouri’s Governor.
But Steelman’s record leaves a bit to be desired. She served one term as the State Treasurer before losing the Republican Gubernatorial primary to Kenny Hulshof, who went on to lose to Democrat Jay Nixon in the general election.
Personally, I think Steelman would be a better bet if for no other reason than all of the political baggage Blunt brings into the race. No matter what, though, it looks like there’s a bloody primary fight brewing, which could very well cripple the GOP’s shot at holding onto this seat.
Filed under: 2008 Election, 2010 Election, Conservatives, House, Progressives | Tags: 2008, 2010, Bill Jefferson, Democrats, Economic Stimulus Package, Hypocrisy, Job Creation Bill, Joseph Cao, Louisiana, Republicans
Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao–the Republican who beat scandal-plagued Congressman William Jefferson last fall–stood with his Republican brethren in voting against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, despite his pledge to support it . As Cao said at the time:
“I’m voting along what my conscience dictates and the needs of the 2nd Congressional District dictate, even if I were to be the only member of the GOP to vote for the stimulus package…I believe that more likely than not, I will vote for it because the 2nd Congressional District needs a stimulus package.”
Needless to say, that was a pretty glaring piece of hypocritical flip-floppery. And, as it turn out, Cao’s constituents don’t appreciate his lie or his vote:
Papers have been filed with the Office of the Louisiana Secretary of State which started the process requiring sufficient signatures to force a recall election for the office held by Representative Cao.
Cao represents a majority African American community many who were outraged by Cao’s vote. Cao made national news with his victory over Bill Jefferson.
[...]
The group of ministers who filed the petition want to make sure that he faces a recall which could be a very daunting act, if not impossible act in Louisiana based upon the state’s history.
No, I don’t think it will succeed. And I think it’s pretty moot since Cao probably won’t get re-elected, anyway. But I think Republicans should have to pay a political price for opposing economic recovery, especially when their own constituents are in desperate need of help.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Government, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Senate | Tags: 2% Doctrine, Budget, Congress, Democrats, Economic Stimulus Package, Federal Spending, Job Creation Bill, Mike Johanns, Republicans, Steven Pearlstein, Stupidity, Taxes
This morning, we learned that America’s unemployment rate has jumped to 7.6%, the highest it’s been in 17 years. As it stands, we’ve lost roughly 3.6 million jobs since this recession started.
There is a job creation bill languishing in the Senate as you read this. Why hasn’t it been passed? Why haven’t we already begun putting Americans back to work?
Well, because the Republicans are holding it up. They only have a problem with 2% of the job creation bill, but apparently that’s enough to shoot it down and kill millions of potential jobs. Whatever happened to bipartisanship and compromise?
Plus, the GOP’s rhetoric on the stimulus shows they know next to nothing about economics, which is why we’re in this mess to begin with–why do you think the Republicans lost the past two elections? Because they spent 8 years running a prosperous economy into the ground.
Steven Pearlstein says it better than I ever could:
As long as we’re about to spend gazillions to stimulate the economy, I’d like to suggest we throw in another $53.5 million for a cause dear to all business journalists: economic literacy. And what better place to start than right here in Washington.
My modest proposal is that lawmakers be authorized to hire personal economic trainers over the coming year to sit by their sides as they fashion the government’s response to the economic crisis and prevent them from uttering the kind of nonsense that has characterized the debate over the stimulus bill during the last two weeks.
[...]
Let’s review some of the more silly arguments about the stimulus bill, starting with the notion that “only” 75 percent of the money can be spent in the next two years, and the rest is therefore “wasted.”
As any economist will tell you, the economy tends to be forward-looking and emotional. So if businesses and households can see immediate benefits from a program while knowing that a bit more stimulus is on the way, they are likely to feel more confident that the recovery will be sustained. That confidence, in turn, will make them more likely to take the risk of buying big-ticket items now and investing in stocks or future ventures.
Moreover, much of the money that can’t be spent right away is for capital improvements such as building and maintaining schools, roads, bridges and sewer systems, or replacing equipment — stuff we’d have to do eventually. So another way to think of this kind of spending is that we’ve simply moved it up to a time, to a point when doing it has important economic benefits and when the price will be less.
Equally specious is the oft-heard complaint that even some of the immediate spending is not stimulative.
“This is not a stimulus plan, it’s a spending plan,” Nebraska’s freshman senator, Mike Johanns (R), said Wednesday in a maiden floor speech full of budget-balancing orthodoxy that would have made Herbert Hoover proud. The stimulus bill, he declared, “won’t create the promised jobs. It won’t activate our economy.”
Johanns was too busy yesterday to explain this radical departure from standard theory and practice. Where does the senator think the $800 billion will go? Down a rabbit hole? Even if the entire sum were to be stolen by federal employees and spent entirely on fast cars, fancy homes, gambling junkets and fancy clothes, it would still be an $800 billion increase in the demand for goods and services — a pretty good working definition for economic stimulus.
[...]
What really irks so many Republicans, of course, is that all the stimulus money isn’t being used to cut individual and business taxes, their cure-all for economic ailments, even though all the credible evidence is that tax cuts are only about half as stimulative as direct government spending.
[...]
Personal economic trainers would confirm all this. Until they’re on board, however, here’s a little crib sheet on stimulus economics:
Spending is stimulus, no matter what it’s for and who does it. The best spending is that which creates jobs and economic activity now, has big payoffs later and disappears from future budgets.
[Emphasis mine]
Democrats are trying to invest in America and Republicans are fiddling while the economy burns. That’s really all there is to it.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Government, House, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine | Tags: Congress, Democrats, Economic Stimulus Packahe, Job Creation Bill, Republicans, Robert Reich
Robert Reich, a man far more knowledgable about the economy than I will ever be, makes his case:
How do we get out of this downward plunge?
Regardless of your ideological stripe, you’ve got to see that when consumers and businesses stop spending and investing, there’s only entity left to step into the breach. It’s government. Major increases in government spending are necessary, and the spending must be on a very large scale. In the last several weeks the President has put forward the outlines of a stimulus plan, and has left it to the House and Senate to fill in the details. A tiny portion of the details that made it into the House version should be stripped away because they seem like old-fashioned pork. But most spending in the bill is absolutely appropriate. My worry is there’s not nearly enough of spending to fill the shortfall in overall demand.Yet at this very moment, Senate Republicans are seeking to strip the President’s stimulus package of many of its spending provisions and substitute tax cuts. Part of this is pure pander: They know tax cuts are more popular with the public than government spending, even though spending is a far more effective way to stimulate the economy (more on this in a moment). Another part is pure partisan politics: Republicans are emboldened by Obama’s willingness to court Republicans (taking three Republicans into his cabinet, bringing Republican leaders into the White House for consultations, putting all those business tax cuts into the stimulus bill in order to gain Republican favor) without getting anything at all back from the GOP. House Republicans snubbed the bill entirely. So, Senate Republicans say to themselves, what’s to lose?
Plenty. Millions more jobs and a full-fledged Depression, for example.
Can we get real for a moment? Take a look at this chart, which comes from calculations by Mark Zandy and his colleagues at economy.com. You see that each dollar of spending has much more impact than each dollar of tax cut.
[Emphasis mine]
Tax cuts just aren’t cost-effective stimulus. As much as Republicans love them, they don’t give us as much bang for our buck as government spending. And in an economy as bad as ours, the government is the only entity big enough to step in and get the economy moving again. You and I can’t create a new job, even if we get a big fat tax cut; the federal government, on the other hand, can step in and create millions of new jobs, something we need right now.
The Republicans lost the last two elections because their ideas failed and because they were not good stewards of the economy or the country. If we have to pass this stimulus over their objections, so be it. But years from now, when the 2010 elections are bearing down on us and the GOP is getting hit for voting against creating millions of new American jobs, they should remember that they had a chance to do some good for this country but threw it all away.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Government, House, Polls, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Senate | Tags: 103rd Congress, 111th Congress, 1977, 1993, 95th Congress, Budget, Congress, Democrats, Economic Stimulus Package, Government Spending, Job Creation Bill, Paul Krugman, Republicans, Tax Cuts, Taxes
Barack Obama, yesterday:
Now, in the past few days I’ve heard criticisms of this plan that echo the very same failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis – the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems; that we can ignore fundamental challenges like energy independence and the high cost of health care and still expect our economy and our country to thrive.
I reject that theory, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change. So I urge members of Congress to act without delay. No plan is perfect, and we should work to make it stronger. But let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the essential. Let’s show people all over our country who are looking for leadership in this difficult time that we are equal to the task.
Today, Republicans control just 41 Senate seats, their smallest Senate caucus since the 95th Congress convened in 1977. They control just 178 House seats, their smallest House caucus since the 103rd Congress convened in 1993. There’s a reason the number of Republicans in Congress is at historic lows: the GOP failed and the American people took their power away.
The Democrats aren’t engaging in nasty partisanship by refusing to include every Republican proposal in the job creation bill; they’re exercising their rightful power as a majority duly elected by the American people. While I certainly don’t believe in majoritarianism–the rights of the minority have to be protected–the GOP minority doesn’t have the right to force every idea they have into this bill. Republicans lost because the American people rejected their ideology–they need to realize that their lack of influence is what the American people wanted, not some kind of idiosyncrasy or aberration.
It’s ironic how the idea of a mandate–which the GOP embraced after George Bush’s razor-thin victory in 2004–has gone out a window now that a popular Democrat is President. And it’s funny how the idea that ‘elections have consequences’ was also thrown out the window at around the same time. The truth is, yes, elections do have consequences, and the main one is that the losers have a diminished capacity to influence legislation. The GOP might not like it–just like the Democrats didn’t like it when we were in the minority–but it’s a reality they need to learn to live with. Obstructionism will not get them their power back, nor will trying to force their unpopular agenda through Congress against the will of the American people.
Nobel laureate Paul Krugman makes a good point:
But the part that really got me was [Columnist David] Broder saying that we need “the best ideas from both parties.”
You see, this isn’t a brainstorming session — it’s a collision of fundamentally incompatible world views. If one thing is clear from the stimulus debate, it’s that the two parties have utterly different economic doctrines. Democrats believe in something more or less like standard textbook macroeconomics; Republicans believe in a doctrine under which tax cuts are the universal elixir, and government spending is almost always bad.
Yes, there is a fundamental disagreement over how to best stimulate the economy and, to some extent, neither party will be happy with a compromise bill. But, again, the Democrats are the majority and the Republicans are the minority; the American people rejected the Republican Party and their ideas for two elections in a row. For that reason alone, the GOP should not have a significant amount of influence over what goes into this bill (which is fortunate, since Republican proposals are not as cost-effective as Democratic proposals). That’s how representative democracy works–the fewer people you represent, the less power you have.
I’m glad to see that the President is finally going on the offensive over this bill. The Republican’s obstructionism and politicking are more than shameful and it’s time for our President to use his significant political capital to get this bill passed. The American people are on his side and Republican Senators are “scared to death” of his popularity, so it’s time for President Obama to wade into this mess and set things straight once and for all.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Government, House, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Senate | Tags: Budget, Congress, Democrats, Economic Stimulus Package, Job Creation Bill, Mark Zandy, Republicans, Stupidity, Tax Cuts, Taxes
The Republicans are going all-out to promote their alternative to the Democratic jobs bill, despite the fact that the Democratic bill already passed through the House of Representatives by a 60-vote margin.
Anyone who stayed awake through Economics 101 knows that both tax cuts and increases in government spending are expansionary fiscal policies; which one you use depends on what you’re trying to accomplish. Right now we need to create jobs, which raises the question, whose policies are better for job creation? Democrats or Republicans?
The graph below compares progressive economic policies (blue) to conservative economic policies (orange) in terms of their effect on job creation:

And the following analysis from economist Mark Zandy shows the return on investment for several forms of tax cut versus several forms of government spending:

As you can see, the most effective tax cut–a payroll tax holiday–produces $1.29 for every $1 spent toward implementing those cuts.
But every spending increase is a more worthwhile investment than even the best tax cut; policies that increase spending produce returns of anywhere from $1.36 (aid to state governments) to $1.73 (increases in food stamps) for every dollar spent.
And, as it turns out, the Republican proposal will cost three times as much as the Democratic job creation plan in the long run:

It’s clear that the Republicans have no idea what they’re doing. The GOP controlled Congress for 6 out of the past 8 years and they controlled the White House for 8 of the past 8 years. This economic crisis happened on their watch and it happened as a result of their policies–their deregulation, their tax cuts, their irresponsible spending policies, their governance.
They proposed tax cuts when the economy was good, they proposed tax cuts when the economy was bad, and now they’re proposing tax cuts when the economy is worse. No matter how bad things get, the GOP will still be pushing tax cuts despite the fact that–as the above analyses show–they’re just not cost-effective forms of economic stimulus. The GOP will continue throwing good money after bad as long as it gets them more tax cuts.
We can’t afford to keep following the same people who got us into this mess in the first place. Republicans complain that they’re being shut out of this process, but they had their chance–they ran the economy for the past eight years and look at where it got us. That’s why the Democrats now control both houses of Congress and the White House–because the Republicans failed.
So let’s stop pretending the GOP has any credibility left on economics and just pass the job creation bill so we can get our economy back on track after 8 years of Republican mismanagement.
Filed under: 2008 Election, 2010 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, 2010, Congress, Democrats, John Suthers, Mark Udall, Michael Bennet, Republicans, Scott McInnis
Attorney General John Suthers, the only Republican elected statewide in Colorado, will not challenge newly-minted Senator Michael Bennet in 2010:
Colorado Attorney General John Suthers pulled himself out of both the U.S. Senate race and the gubernatorial contest next year, announcing today that he would instead seek re-election.
Suthers said in a statement he considered running for both governor against Bill Ritter and the senate seat held now by Michael Bennet. But as the sole Republican holding statewide office, which leaves him without GOP heavy hitters to assist in fundraising and campaigning, either race would take him away from his duties as attorney general, he said.
In addition, former Rep. Scott McInnis, who lost to Mark Udall in the 2008 Senate election, has also signaled that he won’t challenge Bennet.
This means that the GOP’s two biggest potential Senate candidates won’t be running; it’s unclear now who will end up challenging Bennet. But this development indicates that it will be far harder for the CO GOP to win this seat back than first imagined.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Government, Media, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine | Tags: 1932, 1980, 2006, 2008, Bill Kristol, Democrats, Franklin Roosevelt, Republicans, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Weekly Standard
In The Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol writes that the GOP’s helpless disorganization is a good thing, because Republicans were disorganized until Ronald Reagan came along to save America. Or something.
What Kristol doesn’t acknowledge is that charismatic, transformational presidents like Reagan only come along once in a generation, if that. In the 20th century, there were only two presidents who permanently changed the electoral map–Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan.
Barack Obama might or might not fall into that category, it’s far too early to tell. But when they were out of power, the Democratic Party didn’t sit around waiting for a messiah to come. They got to work building the 50-state strategy, building a network of online small donors, crafting messaging, drafting legislation and working on a unified front. The Democrats no strong leader in 2006, but they won because they made fundamental changes to the way they campaigned, raised money and presented their message. And if Democrats hadn’t started doing that work, Barack Obama would never have won the White House.
Elections aren’t magic–they’re won or lost for real, concrete reasons. The Republican Party might need a new, charismatic leader to be able to win again, but that doesn’t mean the GOP shouldn’t be building the infrastructure that will help that person get into office. It’s foolish and naive to think that some conservative savior will come along and singlehandedly change everything with no help whatsoever. A lot has changed since 1980; Republicans need to do more than to sit around praying for the next Reagan.
Former Republican Congressman Tom Davis wrote this a few weeks ago:
[D]oing nothing, I hope Republicans will agree, is not an option.
Apparently Bill Kristol thinks it’s not only an option, but that it’s the best option. And while he and his fellow Republicans are waiting for their electoral Godot, they will end up ceding election after election to the Democrats.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Governors, Media, Right-Wing Noise Machine | Tags: 2008, 2012, Alaska, Hypocrisy, McCain-Palin, Republicans, Sarah Palin
Now that the greatest political soap opera in American history is over Sarah Palin is looking to cash in:
According to the Los Angeles Times, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin wants as much as $11 million for the book she’s reportedly pitching to publishers.
Of course, Palin is really just looking for a way to keep her name in the headlines. How else is she supposed to stay relevant enough to run for president in 2012?
Personally, I wonder how she’ll pretend to be part of a regular middle-class family when she’s a multimillionaire.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Faith, Government, Polls, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Senate | Tags: 2008, Al Franken, Congress, Democrats, John Cornyn, Judaism, Matt Brooks, Minnesota, National Republican Senatorial Committee, Norm Coleman, NRSC, Republican Jewish Coalition, Republicans
Former Senator Norm Coleman has found himself a new job:
Last session’s senior senator from Minnesota Norm Coleman, still battling Al Franken to be seated in the Senate, has taken a paid job as a consultant to the Republican Jewish Coalition, which harshly attacked Obama last fall, its executive director, Matt Brooks, said.
Coleman will join the group as a “consultant and strategic advisor,” and will also travel the country fundraising on the group’s behalf, Brooks said.
“It’s an opportunity for him to, now that he’s got some down time on his hands, to really help us while this case is being adjudicated,” Brooks said. “He hasn’t given up at all” on retaking the Minnesota seat.
That’s not the behavior of a candidate who won his last election; it’s the behavior of a candidate who packed up his office and is moving on.
Coleman knows he lost, that much is obvious. The question is, how long will it take him to officially give up the ghost? Now that he has endeared himself to the Republican establishment by keeping Al Franken out of the Senate–landing himself a nice right-wing welfare job in the process–how long will he keep the charade up? When will he finally let the people of Minnesota enjoy their right to full representation in the Senate?
I can’t imagine the people of Minnesota are too happy that their former Senator won’t let their duly-elected representative take office. And I can’t imagine the people of Minnesota will be very forgiving to the Republican Party in the future after this gambit is all said and done.
UPDATE: More from Nate Silver:
But what is Coleman’s angle here? Increasingly, I think this is being driven by John Cornyn and the [NRSC], and that they’ve given up on beating Franken but merely want to bloody him, casting doubt over the legitimacy of his election in order to make him a focal point for Republican angst. If this were a generic Democrat instead of Franken, in other words, I think the Republicans might already have given up. But because Franken has the potential to be a polarizing figure, there is more incentive for them to fan the flames a little bit; the recount merely provides the pretense for them to do so.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Governors, Media | Tags: Alaska, Media, Republicans, Sarah Palin, Whining
Sarah Palin [to Media]: LEAVE ME ALONE!
MEDIA looks over and notices SARAH PALIN
Media [to Palin]: Oh, are you still here?







