Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

House Republican retirements provide counter-conventional wisdom

1. A rapid-fire trio of Republican retirements -- Reps. Steve Buyer (Ind.), Vern Ehlers (Mich.) and Lincoln Diaz-Balart (Fla.) -- in the last two weeks have raised questions about whether the conventional wisdom that Democrats, facing a difficult political environment nationally, would head for the political hills. Republicans now have 19 open seats to defend while Democrats have 14 vacancies, including that of Rep. Patrick Kennedy (R.I.) who announced his retirement late last night. As we have said before, not all retirements are created equal, however, and -- judging by presidential performance in the open seat districts -- Democrats have at least nine endangered seats while Republicans carry (at most) five seats where the two national parties will spend money. While the two party leaders fight over what the current retirements mean, the real question is how much higher the number will go and where they will come from. In the 2008 cycle, there were 35 total retirements with 29 of them coming on the Republican side. The 2006 cycle had 33 open seats (12 Democratic, 21 Republican); in 2004 there were 34 retirements (15 Democratic, 19 Republican). That means that in the last three elections there were an average of 34 retirements with 23 of them coming on the Republican side and 11 for Democrats. If recent history holds then, only a few more retirements are in the offing -- great news for Democrats. Of course, there was a period of elections from 1992 to 1996 that saw 65, 48 and 49 members retire, respectively. Given the turbulence of the coming midterm election and the fact that Democratic retirements have been kept very low in the last few cycles, it's reasonable to expect the total number of retirements to go to 40 or even higher. ALSO CLICK: The latest New York Times/CBS national poll that shows President Obama maintaining a lead over congressional Republicans on most measures of public support.

2. A new poll out of Indiana suggests that Sen. Evan Bayh (D) is a solid favorite for reelection even with former Republican senator Dan Coats preparing to run. Bayh held a 55 percent to 35 percent edge over Coats while leading less highly touted former representative John Hostettler by a slightly smaller 53 percent to 37 percent margin in the survey, which was conducted by Research 2000 for the liberal Daily Kos blog. Bayh, a scion of one of the most famous political families in the Hoosier State, also enjoyed very solid personal ratings in the survey; 61 percent said they felt favorably toward him while just 33 percent felt unfavorably. Coats, who held a Senate seat in the state from 1989 until 1998, had a less strong 38 percent favorable/34 percent unfavorable score in the poll. Republicans continue to insist that despite a rocky rollout of Coats' candidacy the dynamics of the race are good for them -- noting that Bayh's votes for President Obama's health care bill and the economic stimulus package do not play well at all in the state. And, the Kos poll suggests Obama has fallen considerably since narrowly winning the Hoosier State in 2009; forty-six percent had a favorable view of the president, 49 percent viewed him unfavorably.

3. Nevada Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki on Thursday decided against jumping into the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, taking a potentially major player in the primary race off the field and likely turning the contest into a three-way affair between former state party chairwoman Sue Lowden and businessmen Danny Tarkanian and John Chachas. Krolicki had been encouraged to run by Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) although other national Republicans voiced some reservations about his candidacy given that he had recently been cleared of a criminal indictment related to his tenure as state treasurer. "With Washington Republicans struggling to find a candidate viable in Nevada, maybe they should see if Dan Coats can move there and give it a try," said Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee communications director Eric Schultz. Krolicki's decision coincides with a ramping up on the part of Chachas who dumped $1.3 million of his own money into the race and is coming to Washington next week to talk up his candidacy. Chachas' wealth (and his seeming willingness to spend it) makes him a player in the race although Lowden and Tarkanian run far ahead in primary polling. Republicans are fighting for the right to take on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) who is in deep trouble in his reelection race with polling that shows him trailing virtually every possible GOP candidate.

4. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) delivered his final "state of the state" address on Thursday -- a speech freighted with implications for his near-certain run for president in 2012. The speech was (as expected) heavy on the sort of prairie populism Pawlenty has come to embody. "The people who best know how to create jobs, are the people who have actually done it," he said at one point; at another, he said peoples' attitude toward government was: "Get out of our way. Leave us alone. Make it easier, not harder." Among Pawlenty's proposals were a handful of tax cuts including a 20 percent reduction in the corporate tax rate, increased accountability in the education system and health insurance portability for Minnesota residents. Pawlenty, who is leaving office at the end of this year remains a relatively popular figure in the state. In a late September poll done for the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, 49 percent of the state's voters approved of the job Tpaw was doing while 38 percent disapproved -- not bad numbers in an anti-incumbent atmosphere like this one. But, only three in ten Minnesotans thought Pawlenty should run for president in 2012 while 55 percent were opposed to the idea. ALSO CLICK: For the huge political nerds out there, you can read the whole speech here.)

5. After one of the oddest "work" weeks in modern memory, some order will be restored this morning as we spend an hour -- from 11 a.m. to noon -- fielding questions from our friends and admirers. (You like us . . . right?) We'll chat about the political implications of having shoveled ten times our body weight in snow, the latest on the 2010 midterm and the 2012 presidential elections and, of course, music, books, coffee and maybe even a little field hockey. You can submit questions in advance or just follow along in real time. See you there.

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 12, 2010; 5:49 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Patrick Kennedy won't run for re-election
Next: House retirements pile up

Comments

Obama seeking to maximize his unilateral power - key signal of a socialist to impose one's will on an unwilling population:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/us/politics/13obama.html

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 13, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

It is about time the American people realize the full implications of what the democrats did with the "stimulus" bill last year.


The democrats have not taken the recession seriously.


Instead they went off and diverted the stimulus fund to a whole bunch of democratic special interest programs.


AND then Obama went off to work on health care.

Obama is a horrible failure - his job performance is a complete joke. It makes sense when you hire someone with little experience and who has none virtually nothing in his life.


Blame the democrats for that.


The democrats have been EXTREMELY IRRESPONSIBLE WITH THIS COUNTRY - the democrats are prolonging the recession.


We need to get someone in there with economic and business experience.


HOW HARD IS THAT ???? Apparently so hard the democrats don't get it.


AND you have democratic Congressmen on Chris Matthews claiming they are doing a good job.


HOW OUT-OF-TOUCH CAN YOU BE ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 13, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Re Dan Coats vs Evan Bayh,

Research 2000 exagerate the Dem vote in every poll they do. They have Bennett tied with Norton in Colorado, while Rasmussen has Norton up by 15. Therefore, it's no surprise they show Bayh leading by 20. Rasmussen or any decent pollster will show this race tied or Coats ahead, just like Mike Pence was leading Bayh in Rasmussen's last poll. You just have to connect the dots. Clearly CC has not picked up on this obvious nuance in Research 2000 polls. tsk tsk tsk. And you call yourself a political junkie...

Posted by: Gatecrasher | February 12, 2010 9:20 PM | Report abuse

When in doubt - don't believe the "conventional wisdom." Go against it. Perhaps some private state GOP polls have parsed out that many of the Red state voters need something logical - like Universal Single-Payer Medicare For All.

The main reason that people all over the spectrum hate the Senate/House Health Insurance "Reform" bills. We know they don't do anything but subsidize the insurance companies whose investments "subsidize" the Big Banks.

After 2008's election, "experts" still place the Nation's political "center" in the same place it was imprisoned by the GOP & Reagonomics/Supply-Side Crony Capitalism. It may have moved quite a bit to the left after the meltdown, bailouts, Pharma deal, etc.

Remember the conventional wisdom said that we would now be fighting over Pres. HR Clinton.

Posted by: nyer11 | February 12, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Here are a few things he's done in his first year. Including the choosing of a dog.

http://open.salon.com/blog/je_robertson/2010/01/06/obamas_first_year_a_vast_array_of_underreported_successes

Posted by: elijah24
-------------------------------------------
The dog choose Obama. Something about Barry-O giving him a free lunch for life.

Posted by: leapin | February 12, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Here are a few things he's done in his first year. Including the choosing of a dog.

http://open.salon.com/blog/je_robertson/2010/01/06/obamas_first_year_a_vast_array_of_underreported_successes

Posted by: elijah24 | February 12, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

BHO approval at 56%, 3% above his November 2008 vote percentage.
44's doin' fine.

http://www.dailykos.com/weeklytrends

36 + 1 = 0

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

hey he picked a dog. that's more than he had ever done previously.

Maybe this year a church.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

37th, who did that poll, Klan Digest? would they like him to flee the country with tar and feathers, or on a rail?
A big part of that 64% disapproval is from the left. People who wanted him to be tougher. Some don't want any health-care bill at all, but many are just mad that he hasn't gotten it done yet.

Posted by: elijah24 | February 12, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

43% of Americans say they would rather see Obama flee the country than wait for his term to end.

Obama's approval rating on his handling of health care is at 36%.


Obama's approval rating on the economy is 35%

Thank you broadwayjoe for bringing this to our attention.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

BHO approval at 56% (Research 2000).

Posted by: broadwayjoe
__________________________________

I don't see the point in continuing to practice a deception about Obama's approval rating which is at 45%

Obama is at 36% job approval on health care


and Obama is at 35% on the economy

So Obama is a complete disaster, miserable failure - and headed to almost certain defeat if he doesn't flee the country ahead of the election, which most Americans at this point would prefer.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 1:02 PM
===============================
Research 2000 must be more accurate.

I mean they do polls for The Daily Kos the most accurate, non partisan online news publication out there ;)

Posted by: Cryos | February 12, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

'As for Palin, whose appearance last week at a controversial Tea Party convention appears to have given her a claim to be the de facto leader of the Tea Party movement, Robertson derides her "neo-con flippant viewpoint" and calls her "a duck out of water among true constitutional conservatives."

He adds:

She represents a growing insider's attack to the heart of the Tea Party. Very much like a wolf in sheep's clothing entering in at the gate as an ally, but for all intents and purposes there to seize and capture, not only one or two stray sheep, but the whole flock!'

==

time to go long on popcorn futures

the backstabbing and infighting are heating up... let's see Palin pull some unhinged stunt to get the cameras back on her

Posted by: Noacoler | February 12, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Here's a poll with journalistic standards:

NYT/CBS: 46 Percent
Approval for Obama
Bwaaahhhaaahhhaahhhaaaahhhaaa

Baghdad BJ is delerious.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

37th has picked enough cherries to make a pie and still have left-overs to top a few hot fudge sundaes.

Posted by: JakeD3 | February 12, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

but the jimmy carter revivial groups are proliferating.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

BHO approval at 56% (Research 2000).

Posted by: broadwayjoe
__________________________________

I don't see the point in continuing to practice a deception about Obama's approval rating which is at 45%

Obama is at 36% job approval on health care


and Obama is at 35% on the economy

So Obama is a complete disaster, miserable failure - and headed to almost certain defeat if he doesn't flee the country ahead of the election, which most Americans at this point would prefer.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I have another theory on why there are so many retirements -


Normally if a party in the minority was looking to take over leadership, there would be fewer retirements.

However, there has been a diminishing of committee chairmanship power over the past two decades - in those days, there would be Congressmen looking to take over committees and subcommittee - there was a myriad of mini-power bases all over the committee structure.


The leadership has diminished this to a degree - so the Congressmen have less to look forward too.


Look what happened just today - Harry Reid pulled a jobs bill which was negotiated out by the committee chairman.


30 or 40 years ago I don't think you would see the Senate leadership take a bill from a Committee Chairman - or a mark-up - and completely changed it around.

I wonder if this is happening all time - are the leaderships (in both Houses) respecting the mark-up sessions ???

I guess we could call it a disrespect of the mark-up sessions.

This was a part of the problem with the health care last year - the leadership really did not care what was coming out of the committees.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

BHO approval at 56% (Research 2000).

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Another comment on Obama sending John Brennan out to tell Senators it is unpatriotic to criticize Obama's "Soft on Terrorism" policy.


Wasn't that EXACTLY WHAT OBAMA WAS DOING FOR 4 YEARS BEFORE HE BECAME PRESIDENT ???


I don't believe for one minute that Brennan was making these statements on his own - this is coming from Obama himself -


And the administration.


SO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WAS BASICALLY STATING CLEARY THAT OBAMA WAS ENGAGING IN UNPATRIOTIC AND INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR IN THE YEARS BEFORE HE TOOK OFFICE.


Now how stupid can Obama be to have this line of reasoning out there ?


Obama was basically slamming himself - Obama was slamming an entire set of complaints about Bush which Obama and the democrats -


AND Obama was basically attempting to make the case that part of his presidential campaign platform was unpatriotic.


Either Obama has NO IDEA what he is doing, or they aren't thinking clearly (probably both.)

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

drivl

In response to your comments on Pelosi and the House - WHY in the world weren't the House and the Senate negotiating out a bill all along ? They had all spring, summer and fall to get together.

There were all sorts of deadlines - at this point, it appears that nothing of siginificance was happening.

The White House never put out a bill that it was supporting - supposedly because they identified that as an error of the Hillary health care plan - however, the resulting strategy was perhaps worse.

Case in point, there were substantial negotiations on the Stupak amendment - even the Bishops were brought in - however that amendment was NOT in the Senate bill.


The only conclusion I can draw is that they were intending on ditching the Stupak amendment all along - so why did they have everyone waste their time ?

I guess it comes down to a COMPLETE LACK OF LEADERSHIP ON THE PART OF OBAMA -


We can talk about this a great deal, however the democrats never got their act together, they never got a bill together - and I'm sure the bills had a great deal MORE problems to resolve than has been reported in the press.

It is simply unbelievable that a bill that the administration deemed to be so important would suffer from such INCOMPETENCE - and lack of leadership.


We all know that Obama had little experience coming into office, however this is beyond what any reasonable person would have expected.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget the drindl vs drindl dissonance. Her multiple personalities are always entertaining, if you keep your distance.

Proximity could result in debilitating and grevious wounds. Usually self inflicted, of course.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Hoo boy! It's a drindl vs. drivl cage match today.

I'll post later on the official thread, but I heartily second Jammin' Java as the new Fix chat home. Their coffee is terrific. I was a bit busy during the chat or would have chimed in.

Also, considering taking Little Fix to a show at the right point. We've taken Primo and Secondo out to see Billy Jonas (twice) as well as The Great Zucchini.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 12, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s increasingly public disagreements with President Barack Obama are a reflection of something deeper: the seething resentment some Democrats feel over what they see as cavalier treatment from a wounded White House.


For months, the California lawmaker has been pushing Obama hard in private while praising him in public. But now she’s being more open in her criticism, in part because she feels the White House was wrong — in the wake of the Democrats’ loss in Massachusetts — to push the Senate health care bill on the House when she knew there was no way it would pass


Et tu ninny?

When even Chuck Schumer is upset with the White House, you know something's amiss. In this case, it's news that efforts to boost wind power with taxpayer stimulus dollars are filling foreign coffers and creating foreign jobs.

This is what typifies Dem "leadership" a bunch of egomaniacs with no sense of direction.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Last night, after Max Baucus and Charles Grassley spent weeks negotiating a bipartisan jobs bill, Harry Reid scuttled their efforts and put forward his own $15 billion plan. Democrats, Republicans, and the White House all were caught off guard. Reid's new plan is limited to the Schumer-Hatch payroll tax credit, highway spending, and a few other measly programs. That bellow you hear is the Obama-isn't-liberal-enough left.

Ed Morrissey destroys the Reid bill:

Reid’s decision takes the second stimulus package cost down from $85 billion to $15 billion. That may please fiscal conservatives, but it sets up an embarrassing problem for Barack Obama. No one believes that his $787 billion Porkulus package, now repriced to $862 billion, worked to create jobs, but the Left wing of Democrats thinks it didn’t work because the Democrats didn’t spend enough money. Obama himself has promised a “hard pivot” to job creation and built expectations for a large-scale effort. A $15 billion program that only contains the silly payroll-tax exemption that gives businesses a maximum $6000 for every person they hire and keep all year, more highway project money, a business tax deduction that amounts to a whopping $35 million over 10 years, and a program allowing states to borrow money at a lower interest rate will not only not create jobs, but it will make a laughingstock of the notion that Congress or Obama is taking the problem seriously.

Also note that the Reid bill is about a tenth of the size of the House bill. Will Pelosi like Reid's version any better?

The chances that Obama's latest top priority will expire in conference just increased. If that happens, and the Democrats fail to pass health care via budget reconciliation, his agenda will be a total shambles. The left will abandon him. Discontent with Washington will continue to grow. A "campaign of brazen honesty with the American people" won't be any help, either. That only would make Obama look like a scold (which he already is).

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

'Steve Malloy, author of Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Ruin Your Life, kicked off the first full day of conference proceedings by warning that Obama and his minions are conspiring to control every aspect of Americans' lives—the colors of their cars, the kind of toilet paper they use, how much time they spend in the shower, the temperature of their homes—all under the guise of U.N. greenhouse-gas-reduction schemes. "Obama isn't a U.S. socialist," Malloy thundered. "He's an international socialist. He envisions a one-world government."

I consider myself a conservative and arrived at this conference as a paid-up, rank-and-file attendee, not one of the bemused New York Times types with a media pass. But I also happen to be writing a book for HarperCollins that focuses on 9/11 conspiracy theories, so I have a pretty good idea where the various screws and nuts can be found in the great toolbox of American political life.

Within a few hours in Nashville, I could tell that what I was hearing wasn't just random rhetorical mortar fire being launched at Obama and his political allies: the salvos followed the established script of New World Order conspiracy theories, which have suffused the dubious right-wing fringes of American politics since the days of the John Birch Society.'

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Like all populists, tea partiers are suspicious of power and influence, and anyone who wields them. Their villain list includes the big banks; bailed-out corporations; James Cameron, whose Avatar is seen as a veiled denunciation of the U.S. military; Republican Party institutional figures they feel ignored by, such as chairman Michael Steele; colleges and universities (the more prestigious, the more evil); TheWashington Post; Anderson Cooper; and even FOX News pundits, such as Bill O'Reilly, who have heaped scorn on the tea-party movement's more militant oddballs.

One of the most bizarre moments of the recent tea-party convention came when blogger Andrew Breitbart delivered a particularly vicious fulmination against the mainstream media, prompting everyone to get up, turn toward the media section at the back of the conference room, and scream, "USA! USA! USA!" But the tea partiers' well-documented obsession with President Obama has hardly been diffused by their knack for finding new enemies.'

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

'The tea-party movement has no leader. But it does have a face: William Temple of Brunswick, Ga. For months, the amiable middle-aged activist has been criss-crossing America, appearing at tea-party events dressed in his trademark three-cornered hat and Revolutionary garb. When journalists interview him (which is often—his outfit draws them in like a magnet), he presents himself as a human bridge between the founders' era and our own. "We fought the British over a 3 percent tea tax. We might as well bring the British back," he told NPR during a recent protest outside the Capitol.

It's a charming act, which makes the tea-party movement seem no more unnerving than the people who spend their weekends reenacting the Civil War. But the 18th-century getups mask something disturbing. After I spent the weekend at the Tea Party National Convention in Nashville, Tenn., it has become clear to me that the movement is dominated by people whose vision of the government is conspiratorial and dangerously detached from reality. It's more John Birch than John Adams.'

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Sample of dribbl's "original thinking":

as anotehr poster pointed out, if you got off this board you might be able to find a girlfriend who wuldn't get a restraining order on you.

Posted by: dribbl


Oh wait, that was a regurgitation of someone else, as usual.

poor dingbat. can't spell or think. sounds like a typical liberal. how do you pronounce corpseman? What is the definition of paucity? how many states are there? what language do they speak in Austria? What do typical white people do?

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

"Some copywriters just 'do the copy,' no questions asked"

Some moonbats just do the cut and paste, no questions asked.
and paste, and paste, and paste.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Here's a poll from the New York Times, our national paper of record, that brings good news for 44:

"At a time of deepening political disaffection and intensified distress about the economy, President Obama enjoys an edge over Republicans in the battle for public support, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

While the president is showing signs of vulnerability on his handling of the economy — a majority of respondents say he has yet to offer a clear plan for creating jobs — Americans blame former President George W. Bush, Wall Street and Congress much more than they do Mr. Obama for the nation’s economic problems and the budget deficit, the poll found.

They credit Mr. Obama more than Republicans with making an effort at bipartisanship, and they back the White House’s policies on a variety of disputed issues, including allowing gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military and repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy."

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse


'you can now retire old bat. there is no need to cut and paste your liberal loony "analysis" all day anymore. you have been replaced by a link.'

LOL. i at least have had a career. what will you retire FROM, fratboy? living off of daddy's money, typing in the basement?

as anotehr poster pointed out, if you got off this board you might be able to find a girlfriend who wuldn't get a restraining order on you.

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Very much like a wolf in sheep’s clothing entering in at the gate as an ally, but for all intents and purposes there to seize and capture, not only one or two stray sheep, but the whole flock!'

Get in there and shear those sheep, Sarah!

Posted by: drindl

Very much like a wolf in sheep's clothing entering in at the gate as an ally, but for all intents and purposes there to seize and capture, not only one or two stray sheep, but the whole flock!'

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:07 AM

Still with the double posts dribbl?

Is this the schizo talking again? Maybe time to resize the tin foil hat again.

which me is doing the talking, the angry stupid one or the loony ignorant one? poor dribbl must struggle with this every day.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/11/media-911-truther/

direct link to dribbl's "brain"\/


you can now retire old bat. there is no need to cut and paste your liberal loony "analysis" all day anymore. you have been replaced by a link.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

'Sarah Palin is not dense or erroneous in her view of the Tea Party, just the opposite. She represents a growing insider’s attack to the heart of the Tea Party. Very much like a wolf in sheep’s clothing entering in at the gate as an ally, but for all intents and purposes there to seize and capture, not only one or two stray sheep, but the whole flock!'

Get in there and shear those sheep, Sarah!

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

zouz/drvl/ahole,

copying my name, commenting on my post, only makes you look like a bigger fool than you do already, hard to imagine as that is.

you're just a pale shade, copycat/fratboy.

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

'As for Palin, whose appearance last week at a controversial Tea Party convention appears to have given her a claim to be the de facto leader of the Tea Party movement, Robertson derides her "neo-con flippant viewpoint" and calls her "a duck out of water among true constitutional conservatives."

He adds:

She represents a growing insider's attack to the heart of the Tea Party. Very much like a wolf in sheep's clothing entering in at the gate as an ally, but for all intents and purposes there to seize and capture, not only one or two stray sheep, but the whole flock!'

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

dribbl in her confusion is now repeating the same post over and over.

I think the old bat's mind has fled.

Wasn't it chrissy foxxy with the stuttering problem that sent him into eternal hate for all status?

did the kids make fun of you two for being so stupid?

Take it out on them by insulting people on anonymous blogs every day for the rest of your pitiful lives.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

dribbl is on a tear today.

already eight posts directly from some fireDoglake website.

this is what passes for a career.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

A prominent Tea Party leader from Texas is warning that the movement "is becoming nothing more than a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party," and slamming Sarah Palin as representing "a growing insider's attack to the heart of the Tea Party."

Dale Robertson, the founder of TeaParty.org, is just the latest Tea Partier to express concern that the movement is being hijacked by the GOP.

In a lengthy statement -- entitled "Warning: Tea Party In Danger" -- posted yesterday on the TeaParty.org homepage, Robertson instructs his felllow Tea Partiers to "[b]e alert to turncoats and deceivers being herded into the Tea Party by usurpers from the weakened Republican Party for the sole purpose of capturing our populist movement."

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:53 AM | Report abuse

woouldn't want to offend the terrorists, no would we?

Posted by: drindl


no dear. We must close gitmo immediately. and no waterboarding. and more apologies. and praise of Allah!

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

funny stuff!

'A prominent Tea Party leader from Texas is warning that the movement "is becoming nothing more than a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party," and slamming Sarah Palin as representing "a growing insider's attack to the heart of the Tea Party."

Dale Robertson, the founder of TeaParty.org, is just the latest Tea Partier to express concern that the movement is being hijacked by the GOP.

In a lengthy statement -- entitled "Warning: Tea Party In Danger" -- posted yesterday on the TeaParty.org homepage, Robertson instructs his felllow Tea Partiers to "[b]e alert to turncoats and deceivers being herded into the Tea Party by usurpers from the weakened Republican Party for the sole purpose of capturing our populist movement."

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Even though I am not a huge political nerd, waiting for a late starting meeting, I read Pawlenty's speech. Hypnotic, soporific, just brutally boring. There is no way this guy is going to become POTUS.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 12, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Last week's Gallup Poll showed the president sinking to new lows on his handling of the economy and health care, both drawing the approval of only 36 percent of Americans. Sixty percent disapprove of his approach on health care, while 61 percent don't like how he's handling the economy. Among independents, just 29 percent approve of his economic policies.

The numbers were as bad, if not worse, for the Democratic-controlled Congress, with a Washington Post/ABC News poll showing more than seven in 10 Americans disapproving of the job it is doing.

Significantly, registered independent voters, who will likely decide the outcome of this fall's elections, now say they will vote Republican by 51 percent to 35 percent.

As Obama's poll numbers have fallen, the administration has frantically escalated its claims that its jobs program is working. Vice President Joe Biden said the stimulus was "responsible for over 1 million jobs so far," either saved or created.

But few economists believe these claims, and the employment numbers do not support them. Businesses slashed 20,000 more jobs in January, and the Labor Department reported that the economy actually lost 150,000 jobs in December, not 85,000, as it previously reported.

The White House tried to make much of the unemployment rate's drop to 9.7 percent, but that was largely due to a sharp increase in the number of Americans who have given up looking for work, which rose to 1.1 million last month. "Each week, more than 450,000 Americans apply for new unemployment benefits, and 17 percent of adults can't find a full-time job or have quit looking for work altogether," said University of Maryland economist Peter Morici.
The West Wing is filled with people who are in their jobs because of their Chicago connections" but who have no experience in governing at the executive-branch level, Wilder wrote at the Politico Web site.

The much deeper problem, of course, is that Obama doesn't have any executive experience, either.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

"On Tuesday, the Missouri State Senate debated President Obama’s call to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) with dueling “non-binding resolutions alternately calling for the repeal and preservation of the military policy.” Both sides regurgitated familiar arguments but State Senator Gary Nodler, who is running in the Republican primary for Rep. Roy Blunt’s (R-MI) seat, carved out a new reason for maintaining the current policy.

Nodler said that allowing openly gay soldiers in the military “could represent a ‘cultural affront‘” to terrorists intent on killing American troops. "

woouldn't want to offend the terrorists, no would we?

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Barry wasn't elected to help out Wall Street Fat Cats.

He was elected by taking their money.

Hence he doesn't begrudge them their enormous bonuses.

Can we pinpoint the exact date he stopped making sense?

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

another TP crackpot:

Debra Medina, a nurse and Tea Party activist running for the Republican nomination for governor in Texas, has had a recent surge in popularity thanks to heavy promotion by the Tea Party movement. She is even further to the right than current Gov. Rick Perry (R) and has spoken at pro-secession rallies, saying “we are aware that stepping off into secession may indeed be a bloody war.” Today on Fox News host Glenn Beck’s radio show, Medina took her right-wing lunacy to new heights:

BECK: Do you believe the government was any way involved with the bringing down of the World Trade Centers on 9/11?

MEDINA: I don’t, I don’t have all of the evidence there, Glenn. I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard. There are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all of the evidence there.

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

BHO is finally fighting back!

"The Senate confirmed 27 high-level Obama nominees Thursday evening just days after President Obama threatened to use recess appoints. The Senate is scheduled to begin their break on Monday, Feb. 15.

On Tuesday, Obama met with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in a bipartisan meeting and warned that he would use the upcoming Senate recess to appoint his nominees. At the beginning of the week, more than 63 nominees had holds on their confirmation."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/11/gop-blinks-27-obama-nomin_n_459447.html

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

I adhere to the thought where no incumbent, D or R, is ever safe in times of economic instability. We can posture politically all we want, but you cannot sway the wrath of an angry populace. Expect large turnovers, and staunch political pundits reading too much into them.

People are unsettled, and therefore scapegoat problems where they can. It really doesn't matter what party you belong to.

Posted by: trident420 | February 12, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

China demands U-turn on Obama's Dalai Lama meet
A justifiably emboldened China tells Obama how to run our foreign policy

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

At the beginning of this week, the Senate was sitting on 63 of President Obama’s nominees because of holds placed on them by one or more senators. In a bipartisan meeting with congressional leaders on Tuesday, Obama warned Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that he would be forced to make a large number of recess appointments if Republicans didn’t stop their politicking and help break the “unprecedented” logjam before the Senate’s Presidents’ Day recess. Today, the Senate finally confirmed 27 of these nominees. However, in his statement, Obama held out the possibility of using recess appointments in the future if Republicans continue to block his nominees:

While this is a good first step, there are still dozens of nominees on hold who deserve a similar vote, and I will be looking for action from the Senate when it returns from recess. If they do not act, I reserve the right to use my recess appointment authority in the future.

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Re #4:

It's cold. Darn cold! Real cold!

Coldest thing is my shorts.
I could make ice cream in them.
A little crotch pot cooking.

Posted by: JakeD3 | February 12, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

From Fix coworker today on Sistah Sarah:

"More to the point, Palin's refusal to rule out a run for the White House seems, at present, completely ludicrous. An astounding 71 percent of Americans do not believe that Palin is qualified to serve as president, the Post poll found. This number includes not only virtually all Democrats and two-thirds of independents but also a majority of Republicans -- 52 percent -- who believe that Palin should not be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/11/AR2010021103483.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Well said, Gene. Your second Pulitzer is on the way...

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

"A new survey commissioned by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America and Credo Action finds that a majority of Minnesotans — 56 percent — are embarrassed by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN). Only 29 percent answered that they were “proud” of her, and 15 percent were “not sure.”

One of the teabagger queens, Michelle is an embarrasment to her state.

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

It can be no secret by now that President Obama did not have a signature achievement his first year in office. Of all his major initiatives, health care, cap and trade, civilian trials for terrorists and the “stimulus” bill – only the so-called stimulus bill was enacted. Hardly a success, as more Americans than not know what Paul Krugman and E.J. Dionne do not – that it was a bad idea. Worse for the Democrats — none of those efforts have produced a greater consensus or momentum for them or Obama. To the contrary, the Democrats lost key races in 2009, a Democrat House Member defected to the Republicans, the nation is more divided than ever and the Democrat Party is in disarray — as in the Obama presidency.

Not to be out-done by 2009, in 2010, the Obama presidency has endured:

(1) the loss of the Kennedy seat (which is how the Democrats view that race) even though Obama stumped for the Democrats’ candidate;

(2) Obama’s deficit commission was shot down;

(3) The unions are warning the Democrats that they are “going to have a hard time getting members out to vote”;


(4) Democrats are slowly signing onto a bill to defeat Obama’s civilian trial for terrorists,

(5) Obama’s TSA nomination died before a vote;

(6) Obama’s NLRB nomination died after a vote;

(7) Nancy Pelosi is openly criticizing Obama’s plans for a job bill;

(8) Some Democrats are openly worrying about the political effect of the expiration of the Bush tax cuts;

(9) the left, in general, is openly criticizing Obama on a host of issues from the wars to his comments on Wall Street bonuses.

In other words, far from standing with Obama, Democrats have no fear of Obama anymore and all of that is playing almost daily in the nation’s newspapers, TV and the internet. Obama’s troubles are coming far too fast for even the mainstream media to ignore. Highlighting all of those problems is the fact that Obama’s poll numbers have reached new lows.

Posted by: drivl | February 12, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

d, FACTS are a b----, aren't they?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

#1: I still think Republicans have a great shot of taking back the US House. Steve Buyer's district is very Republican, and it looks like a 2 way R primary fight between Sec. of state Todd Rokita and St. Sen. Brandt Hershman. Rokita begins the race a favorite. I think either of them crushes any d nominee. Vern Ehlers is also in a fairly conservative district, and Republicans are getting their preferred candidate in Secretary of State Terri Land to run. She is the heavy favorite to be the next US congressman from Michigan's 3rd. This is also looking to be a Republican year in Michigan. Right now Mike Cox leads the Governor's R primary, but political outsider and businessman Rick Snyder has only begun to fight with a superbowl commercial and a string of high profiled endorsements coming mainly from the business community, including the Ford family. Strong Republican year in Michigan brewing. In Florida Dems. do have a real shot at a pick-up. They have a better shot at a pick up if Mario runs for Lincoln's seat in the 21st. Although, I do think if Mario runs in the 21st, that seat goes to safe. Then the 25th will be the tough one, but with State Rep. David Riveria in the race will keep it leaning slightly Republican. This seat will become more safe if Marco Rubio is the Republican Senate nominee, as he will excite cuban population and the conservative movement to get out and vote in Florida. I think 2010 is going to be a huge Republican year and I think were going to be looking at Speaker Boehner. I personally think John Boehner is better as House Majority Ldr. and the speaker should be Eric Cantor. I think a Speaker Cantor & Sen. majority ldr. Boehner will be a more effective team. A Speaker Boehner will serve as a divisive figure, as speaker Pelosi does. Speaker Cantor will serve as a much more effective speaker with less drama.

Posted by: reason5 | February 12, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

The perfect Manchurian candidate --

perfectly positioned to put the interests of foreign countries above US citizens -- and perhaps endanger national security-- all for a buck:

"Former U.S. Sen. Dan Coats, who is likely to challenge Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) this fall, lobbied for a Texas-based oil and gas company that partnered with Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez, according to Senate lobbying disclosure forms.

The Indiana Republican, a Senator from 1989 to 1999, is listed on electronic lobbying disclosure forms for Harvest Natural Resources, which operates in Venezuela, Russia and Pakistan."

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

@37 --

It's worth another try:

"The way you walked was thorny, through no fault of your own. But as the rain enters the soil, the river enters the sea, so tears run to a predestined end. Your suffering is over. Now you will find peace for eternity."

All the best.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

You betcha, Joe...

And look at the background of that stellar Dan Coats -- just what we need more of government!

Ex-Sen. Dan Coats (R) has spent the past several years advocating on behalf of pharmaceutical companies, major health care firms and big corporations, according to a client roster provided to Hotline OnCall.

Coats, a registered lobbyist at the powerhouse firms King & Spalding and Verner Liipfert Bernhard McPherson & Hand, counts PhRMA and the Healthcare Leadership Council, an organization made up of health care company CEOs, among his clients.

He has also aided the New York Stock Exchange, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and Bank of America. All 3 big banks accepted bailout funds, a Dem source pointed out.

Coats also did business with Bombardier, the Canadian aerospace and railroad company that manufactures popular regional jet aircraft. Since entering the market, Bombardier has taken significant market share away from US-based Boeing.

And Coats, who took ex-VP Dan Quayle's House and Senate seat when Quayle advanced, is still benefiting from that relationship -- he lobbied for Cerberus Capital Management, where Quayle works."

He worked for Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, and B of A. Teabaggers must love him! Oh, wait...

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

That dreamy coup, Coats, has a Venezuelan skeleton in his closet -- Hugo Chavez:

"A quick refresher: Coats's firm, King & Spaulding, received $470,000 in fees from Houston-based Harvest Natural Resources from 2005 to 2008, according to the Senate's lobbying database. During that period, the company concluded a deal with the Chavez government that gave it roughly a third of the revenue generated from projects it developed.

Kevin Kellems, Coats's spokesman, sends an e-mail today claiming the story "got the Venezuela charge exactly backwards. The firm helped an American company deal with the fact that Chavez was trying to confiscate their business assets."

Kellems, himself a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, says Coats had no 'direct' dealings with Chavez, despite his appearance on three years' worth of disclosure forms.

Kellems downplayed Coats' role, writing:

"Dan Coats was asked by the firm to assist in setting up two appointments for a Texas company — appointments with a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs committees."

Lobbying reports from that period, which list Coats as the main lobbyist on the Harvest-Venezuela account, list contacts with the "Executive Office of the President."

Kellems didn't immediately respond to an e-mail asking Kellems if Coats addressed the Harvest negotiations with the president or any of his top advisers.'

So Coats is tight with both Cheney and Wolfowitz, and lobbied for Chavez, looks like? But his office is very tight-lipped about it... seems like there's much more to this than we know right now.

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe


Apparently you have tipped us off to your education level or at least the way you think - everything you know has been learned from movies to tv shows.

To the point that you are quoting scripts in order to learn lesson for real life.


You are some sad person.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

The wheels are coming off at the White House - here is the third example of the craziness of the Obama administration over the past few weeks.


Over the past two or three weeks - we have witnessed Obama lay out a carefully thought-out calculation about what parts of the budget Bush is still responsible for - and by implication what parts Obama believes he is now responsible.

THEN WE HAVE BIDEN OUT THERE YESTERDAY TRYING TO CLAIM CREDIT FOR THE VICTORY IN IRAQ WHICH WAS BROUGHT ABOUT BY BUSH' SURGE OF TROOPS.

This policy Obama spoke out AGAINST many many times.


So now, Obama is trying to claim credit backwards into the Bush administration - Is Obama going to now take credit for the pull-out agreement with the Iraqis which Bush negotiated ????

The silliness here is apparent -


But it is also a vast and sustained effort at deception - Obama is lying to the American people again.

Obama's policies have been a disaster -


Obama's platform on which he was elected has either been abandoned by Obama himself, proven to be a FRAUD, or proven to be completely unworkable.

And now you have the Obama administration basically talking gibberish for the past three weeks.


This Brennan stuff, which is in the postings below - and Obama's budget calculations - the whole thing is a complete mess.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Excellent stuff today: the Fix unplugged (we hope) from the (increasingly discredited) BroderWorld "Matrix" for the SECOND straight day:

"A rapid-fire trio of Republican retirements -- Reps. Steve Buyer (Ind.), Vern Ehlers (Mich.) and Lincoln Diaz-Balart (Fla.) -- in the last two weeks have raised questions about whether the conventional wisdom that Democrats, facing a difficult political environment nationally, would head for the political hills. Republicans now have 19 open seats to defend while Democrats have 14 vacancies, including that of Rep. Patrick Kennedy (R.I.) who announced his retirement late last night."

Now THAT is "Political News & Analysis"!
________________

"Morpheus: Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.""

Take it one day at a time, Fix...

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 12, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

'the animus toward Obama and their party.'

'animus' indeed -- more like blind baseless hatred.

Posted by: drindl | February 12, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Your wishful thinking falls flat. Democrats cannot win the seats held by these Republicans. They are announcing early enough to pave the way for maintaining the seat in the party and on the other side the Democrats will be beaten because of the awful job they are doing and the animus toward Obama and their party.

Posted by: davispope | February 12, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Another comment on Obama sending John Brennan out to tell Senators it is unpatriotic to criticize Obama's "Soft on Terrorism" policy.


Wasn't that EXACTLY WHAT OBAMA WAS DOING FOR 4 YEARS BEFORE HE BECAME PRESIDENT ???

I don't believe for one minute that Brennan was making these statements on his own - this is coming from Obama himself -


And the administration.

SO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WAS BASICALLY STATING CLEARY THAT OBAMA WAS ENGAGING IN UNPATRIOTIC AND INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR IN THE YEARS BEFORE HE TOOK OFFICE.

Now how stupid can Obama be to have this line of reasoning out there ?

Obama was basically slamming himself - Obama was slamming an entire set of complaints about Bush which Obama and the democrats -


AND Obama was basically attempting to make the case that part of his presidential campaign platform was unpatriotic.

Either Obama has NO IDEA what he is doing, or they aren't thinking clearly (probably both.)

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

#1 Meh at Obama being more popular than Congressional Republicans. It's not that hard. I think even Bush was more popular than Congress when he left.

#2 I believe one of the major health insurance companies in Indiana just jacked up its prices. This might have bad implications for Coats who spent time as a health care lobbyist. I think Bayh will be able to hammer him on the profession in general, but the insurance rate hike will just magnify everything.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 12, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

The Obama administration is really losing its direction - they are shooting at themselves and they are not thinking things through at all.


First, they send John Brennan out to attack the Republicans as being unpatriotic because they are not supporting the "Soft of Terror" policies of Obama.


Aside from the actual merits, John Brennan should not be out there in a partisan role - AND Brennan should not be telling Senators what they should and should not be saying.


You have someone Brennan who should not be going to partisan battle - telling people who should be in the partisan field to stay away from partisan politics.


How silly is that?


Extremely odd and inappropriate behavior from the administration and Obama - they don't know what they are doing at the White House.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Chris:

Take a look at these boards over the past few weeks - there is an organized group of people on your blog - they are working together in someway - it is clear because they come in and out together.

It is possible that a few of these people are operating under two or three screen names - so they may appear to be three posters when they are actually one.

However - there is an organized effort on this board - they complain together when they feel they are not getting their way. I just want you to be aware of this - and if you have suspicions about these people - they are probably well founded.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 12, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Pawlenty's 'prairie populism' is a race to the bottom program. The idea is built on the premise that businesses choose where to locate based solely on tax rates. Couple that with the idea that cheap labor is a sound foundation on which to build an economy and *presto* you have the race to the bottom.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 12, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

As a CPA more and more people are surprised at the size of their refunds this year. They are asking me about the credit on line 63 of their tax returns. I tell them that is from the stimulus bill passed last year. I think more and more people are going to see the stimulus bill favorably and realize that no Republican voted for it. I think people are going to see pictures of the party of hypocrites at ribbon cuttings of stimulus projects being quoted saying how many jobs these projects are created. I really do not thing the Republicans are going to do as well as the current polling says they will.

Posted by: bradcpa | February 12, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Well maybe Reid is really optimistic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/12/us/politics/12poll.html?hp

Maybe he thinks kicking back at Republicans will work for him. It isn't like Senator Hatch did Reid a lot of favors with the Health Care bill. But he seems steamed at Reid for not being bipartisan.

“Needless to say, Senator Hatch is deeply disappointed that the majority leader has abandoned a genuine bipartisan compromise only hours after it was unveiled in favor of business-as-usual, partisan gamesmanship,” said Antonia Ferrier, a spokeswoman for Mr. Hatch..."

Posted by: shrink2 | February 12, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

I'm not sure what's up. Reid just nuked a jobs bill with some bipartisan support. It's too late to build deficit hawk credentials, so the move left many scratching their heads. The next leader of the Senate Democrats should be nicknamed Icarus.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | February 12, 2010 8:49 AM | Report abuse

Nevada is an ongoing economic disaster area.
Still at 13% unemployment, 10,000 new foreclosures in Clark County in January...
stick a fork in Harry Reid. Whoever beats him will get to share credit for the recovery, so the battle should be fierce.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 12, 2010 8:37 AM | Report abuse

These seats may seem safe and the numbers may not be overwhelming, but any fight the GOP has over a retirement seat is a fight they're not engaging in over a potential pick-up.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | February 12, 2010 8:05 AM | Report abuse

I don't think Pawlenty actually embodies Prairie Populism, but he sure can trot out the platitudes and the rosey-Reagan-dreams-o'-the-past pablum.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | February 12, 2010 8:04 AM | Report abuse

#3. when Reid, historically a centrist western D, became SMajL, I thought his 'ole boy connections would serve him well. Perhaps they did; we will be able to compare when a big state liberal becomes SMajL after Reid loses his seat. The leadership job put him in the spotlight and the crosshairs. He had to be out front on positions his constituency did not approve.

Now he opposes cloture modification - his ole boy self comes out. Too late for his reelection chances and too bad for Senate reform.

Still, he might pull it out on the power=bacon argument. TD did not, but his state had a more R lean.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 12, 2010 7:27 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company