Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Morning Fix: Voters are voting in Massachusetts!

1. It's zero hour in the Massachusetts Senate special election race to replace the late Ted Kennedy. The action is all on the Democratic side but thanks to state Attorney General Martha Coakley's name identification and financial advantages this is a race that has been -- as Jmart recently noted -- defined by its distinct lack of excitement. Barring a major upset, Coakley will cruise to the Democratic nod today with Rep. Mike Capuano, who, even though he is almost certain to come up short, has acquitted himself well, expected to come in second. Boston Celtics co-owner Steve Pagliuca spent $9 million of his own money largely on television ads but never gained much traction. City Year co-founder Alan Khazei won the endorsement of the Boston Globe and was on the receiving end of a sort-of endorsement from Caroline Kennedy but not much else. State Sen. Scott Brown has put together a solid campaign team and will be the Republican nominee but has little chance at knocking off Coakley (or any other Democrat) in the Jan. 19 special general election. (Want more on the Massachusetts Senate race? Check out item #9)

2. An astute Fixista flagged a fascinating interview that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin gave to conservative talk radio host Lars Larson last Friday in which she appears to leave the door open to a third party bid for president in 2012. Asked by Larson whether she would consider running as a third party candidate, Palin said: "That depends on how things go in the next couple of years." Larson told the 2008 vice presidential nominee that answer "sounds like a yes" to which she responded: "If the Republican party gets back to that [conservative] base, I think our party is going to be stronger and there's not going to be a need for a third party, but I'll play that by ear in these coming months, coming years." Which, to the Fix's delicate ears, sounds like Palin leaving the door wide open. As we have written before, Palin is not -- and never will be -- a candidate of the Republican establishment. Given that, and the unpredictability she demonstrated in her stunning decision to resign as governor over the summer, no potential avenue to the presidency should be ruled out.

3. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) broke one of the Fix's cardinal rules of politics yesterday when, during a speech on health care on the Senate floor, he equated Republican calls for a re-do of the legislation to the legislative slow-walking surrounding the end of slavery. (Fix cardinal rule #4: Don't ever draw comparisons between politics and a) Nazi Germany b) slavery c) domestic violence//violence against women. Ever. Just don't do it.) Republicans immediately pounced, calling on Democratic Senators in Arkansas, Colorado, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, Indiana, New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio, and Kentucky to denounce the remarks. Reid spokesman Jim Manley said that it was "hard to believe" Republicans were making these charges, noting: "For the past eight days they've done nothing but obstruct health care on the Senate floor and throughout this year have played politics with this and virtually every other issue of importance to the American people." While we are certain Reid was trying to contextualize what was at stake in the health care debate by providing a broad sweep of history-making votes, he also should know that he is the number one target for Senate Republicans heading into 2010 and statements like this won't help him make his case to Nevada voters.

4. The Fix sat down with Linda McMahon, ex-CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment and current candidate for the Republican Senate nomination in Connecticut, on Monday and came away -- generally -- impressed. McMahon has the "I'm an outsider" rap down pat and can rattle off former Rep. Rob Simmons' "bad" votes -- card check, cap and trade -- without even a pause. "We couldn't be farther apart on those issues," said McMahon. But, although McMahon touted her fiscal conservatives bona fides, she said she would have supported the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), which Simmons has said he would have opposed, and didn't have a clear answer on whether she would have voted for the Bush tax cuts passed earlier this decade. She remains a work in progress as a candidate -- without question -- but has two things going for her: 1) her immense personal wealth that will allow her to flood the state with ads between now and the August 2010 primary and 2) she will be hard to caricature as a smut peddling, steroid-encouraging business tycoon. Still, Simmons starts with a clear edge thanks to his name identification built up over six years in the House.

5. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Md.) has largely been overshadowed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) -- for good and for bad -- in this Congress but Hoyer delivered a speech worth reading on Monday at the Center for American Progress. Hoyer's address is rightly regarded as a blueprint for House Democrats as they seek to buck history (and the current less-than-favorable political environment) in 2010. Hoyer dismisses the Republican party as "an organization committed to an unprecedented level of lockstep opposition to the president: a 'Party of No,' whose political strategy is an investment in failure for our country and paralysis for its institutions." Polling does suggest that voters remain skeptical of the GOP and its commitment (or lack thereof) to offering solutions for the country but there is also real doubt about whether one-party rule is the right thing for Washington. Read the whole thing -- you can expect many endangered Democrats borrowing from Hoyer on the campaign trail in the coming months.

6. Rick Santorum heads to South Carolina today to campaign for Rep. Gresham Barrett's (R) gubernatorial campaign, the latest sign that the former Pennsylvania Senator is positioning himself to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. Santorum will do events in Bluffton, Rock Hill and Spartanburg today and tomorrow for Barrett who is one of four Republicans running to replace term limited (and disgraced) Gov. Mark Sanford next November. Santorum, who was badly beaten by Sen. Bob Casey (D) in 2006, has made little secret of his interest in running for president and made a stop earlier this year in Iowa, the state almost certain to host the first vote of the 2012 presidential primary season. Santorum's path to relevance as a candidate is filled with "if"'s; IF former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin decides not to run and IF former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee decides not to run and IF former Speaker Newt Gingrich either doesn't run or his message doesn't catch on with social conservatives, THEN Santorum could be the candidate of movement conservatives.

7. Speaking of 2012, Tom Schaller, professor of political science at University of Maryland Baltimore County has penned a terrific piece -- that we initially missed -- laying out the various nomination scenarios for the 2012 GOP presidential fight. An example? The "next-in line scenario" of which Schaller writes: "Trouble is, it's hard to figure out who that next man is -- or if it even is a man. Is Sarah Palin next in line by virtue of her '08 vice presidential candidacy, or are Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney, given the number of states they picked up in last year's primaries." The piece is well worth a read as it smartly games out who might be in the field and how each of them can or can't win. Our 2012 first tier (and, yes, we know it's too early): Former Govs. Mitt Romney (Mass.), Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee. But, keep an eye on South Dakota Sen. John Thune and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty -- both of whom could rise into the top tier.

8. "Politics and Pints", the Fix's first stab at a political trivia night, was -- we think -- an unbridled success thanks to a terrific turnout (30 teams!), great question and answer counters (Post PR guru Kris Coratti and events aficionado Lisa Goldstein) and a great location at the Capital Lounge. The winners were "Dick Swett", a team comprised of staffers at the Hotline led by political savant Quinn McCord. Here's a pic of the winners with their coveted official Fix t-shirts. Miss last night's festivities? Never fear -- we are aiming to do one a month in the 2010. Stay tuned.

9. What better way to kill the hours before polls close in the Massachusetts Senate election at 8 pm eastern time tonight than to test your knowledge about the Bay State race in the Post's daily politics quiz? Test yourself and see if you are as smart as David Wade

10. Sasha Frere-Jones, the New Yorker's music critic aka holder of the Fix's dream job, is out with his "best of" list for 2009. LOVE the inclusion of Fever Ray and Dirty Projectors as best albums but can't forgive "I and Love and You" by the Avett Brothers not making the list. ALSO WORTH FOLLOWING: Sasha's Twitter feed.

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 8, 2009; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Politics and Pints!
Next: The most important number in politics today

Comments

Sarah is definitely giving the GOP some heart burn. She stands to lead the Tea Party in an uprising if the GOP hierarchy doesn't change it's stance to continue a democrat lite agenda... Read: Will Sarah lead the Tea Party Movement...at..

http://cooperscopy.blogspot.com/

Posted by: ronsuev | December 9, 2009 1:25 AM | Report abuse

Following up on #1: Coakley wins in a walk (50% of the vote). Say hello to Sen. Coakley. At the current pace, it's not even clear if they needed to bother appointing Sen. Kirk. Nice capper to his career, though.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 8, 2009 9:43 PM | Report abuse

I could make this claim however, those “hopping happy about Obama”

==

More caricatures.

Fine, you talk about your GOP comic books the rest of your sad inadequate life.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 8, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

The demographic that you claim represents "real America" because they're "hopping mad about Obama" are, the envelope please, white, rural, uneducated and, yes, old.
See any footage from the town hall meetings? Any of those red-faced yellers look like they were in their 20s, 30s, 40s?
Deal with reality, you'll get further.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
------------------------------------------
I did not make a claim. I could make this claim however, those “hopping happy about Obama” are ignorant, and, yes, many are young and naïve and too burdoned not to repeat negative history.

Posted by: leapin | December 8, 2009 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Your concerns, unfortunately, are not the concerns of the age bigots, government dependents, elitists, free lunchers and other neocom statists frequenting this blog.

==

Trying on the language of the postmodernists? Good luck.

Ignoring the silly caricatures and the paranoia, I'll address only the "age bigot" canard ... the demographic that went for McCain, the only one where he did well, was in post-middle-age white men in the south.

The demographic that you claim represents "real America" because they're "hopping mad about Obama" are, the envelope please, white, rural, uneducated and, yes, old.

See any footage from the town hall meetings? Any of those red-faced yellers look like they were in their 20s, 30s, 40s?

Deal with reality, you'll get further.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 8, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Sorry AndyR3, there is a massive amount of anger building in the Country in part due to unemployment, but also to the rendering of the Constitution and government attack against our liberties.
==
Yeah there's massive anger in the Beck/Palin crowd, but who cares? A pack of aging rednecks facing attrition by age.
You need to get out more. You'll have to watch your language though.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite

------------------------------------------
AndyR3 –

Your concerns, unfortunately, are not the concerns of the age bigots, government dependents, elitists, free lunchers and other neocom statists frequenting this blog.

Posted by: leapin | December 8, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Sorry AndyR3, there is a massive amount of anger building in the Country in part due to unemployment, but also to the rendering of the Constitution and government attack against our liberties.

==

Yeah there's massive anger in the Beck/Palin crowd, but who cares? A pack of aging rednecks facing attrition by age.

You need to get out more. You'll have to watch your language though.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 8, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Do they still have voting in the "cradle of the Democrats"?

Posted by: leapin | December 8, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Bubbette, here is why you are mistaken: independents don’t drink the Glenn Beck kool-ade. They know that this economic/employment crisis started before Obama was sworn in, and that any improvement is proof of the good decision that he was. They will remember that in 2012. But even if I’m wrong (and I’m not) the republican party has not a single solid candidate. Not one. And even if I’m wrong about that (and I’m not) with Palin moving toward a 3rd party run, the GOP cannot survive a split in their base. They certainly won’t take enough of the independents to cover their own base. The GOP road to the White House is up-hill, icy, curvy, and very narrow. They need to get their own house in order before they even think seriously about dreams of a white one.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Sorry AndyR3, there is a massive amount of anger building in the Country in part due to unemployment, but also to the rendering of the Constitution and government attack against our liberties.

The Democrats have lost the Independent vote. Keep in mind it was the Independent vote that put Obuma in the White House. In 2010 the Democrats are going to take a beating. Will they lose over 45 seats in the House is the only question.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | December 8, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

I was just on a conservative blog and a poll asked if Huckabee's career is over now -- 86% answered yes.

==

That's a poll of people whose wholeness of mind enables them to believe that Obama started the economic collapse and got us into Afghanistan.

Run the same poll in two hours and you'll get a different answer. These are not bright people.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 8, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Thinking she has a shot at the GOP nomination in 2012 is bad enough. Palin is truly delusional if she believes a third-party run is viable. Her base is not that big, contrary to her own inflated and egotistical reports.

==

She should be encouraged to tilt at this windmill. A Palin third party run will do for the Democrats what Ross Perot did a few elections ago, with the added advantage of not splitting the loss with Democrats .. Palin will never get a single vote from anyone with the smallest chance of voting Democrat, but she will sump millions of votes away from the GOP.

But I still don't understand this column's ongoing fascination with this ditz. She is no longer in politics, any more than, oh, Lou Dobbs is in politics, and following her quest for attention is getting a little old. She's stupid, she's tiresome, she's shallow, why don't you set up a Teabagger Blog that's all Palin all the time and save this one for news that, you know, "matters?"

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 8, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

I hear all the time that we need a third party. The reality of the matter is, it isn’t going to happen. We are stuck with a two party system. Our form of government will not allow a third party to have a serious chance to win at the national level. And when they try, all they really do is take votes away from the party closest to their way of thinking and hand the election to the side that hates all that they stand for (see Nader 2000). The best we can do is get involved in the parties that exist and try to direct them from the inside to be what they claim to be.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse

The Republican party is the modern Know Nothing party. But the Democratic party has excess hubris, is just as subservient to special interest groups, supports or acquiesces in Obama's war in Afghanistan, and is on the verge of enacting a substantially health care fraud bill, with relatively few, limited, delayed reforms, probably to be financed on the backs of older people in this country.

Anyone who thinks Obama and most Democrats in Congress are progressives needs to give up their kool-aid. A third party, representing ordinary people, not special interest groups, is needed.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | December 8, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

I believe Chris's "cardinal rule" mentioned is not about his sense of right and wrong, but about what he believes will always have a detrimental effect on one's ability to be taken seriously as a politician. This blog, after all, is about elections and electability; Chris is saying that a politician who doesn't want to look like a fool ought to stay away from making references to Nazis, slavery and domestic abuse. To that end, those who embrace the comparison of President Obama to Adolf Hitler don't count, as they are neither elected officials nor individuals seeking office.

There's a joke to be made about politicians wanting to be taken seriously and some of the things Michele Bachmann says, but I'll let someone else make it.

Posted by: GJonahJameson | December 8, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

It is a little galling to have the GOP grinching and moaning about how Obama is fixing their unbelievable mess.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 8, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Yes, I too would like to see this list of cardinal rules...because number one had better be, "Don't spend 8 years ruining the country while you're in charge and then immediately blame it on the new guy when you get tossed."

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | December 8, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

I won't bother to list the Democrats who's morals are nothing to look up to =just the lastest- Baucus. And foul mouth Al is such a wonderful man What a joke!
Posted by: SueG1
-----------------
See, Sue, the difference here is, and has always been, that the Dems don't confuse 'freedom of religion' with 'be a Christian or else'.
The Dems are not the ones constantly trying to knock down the wall separating Church and State. The Dems were not the ones that opened the door to (Christian) churches getting Federal money.
In the 2008 campaign season I didn't see any Dems questioning the patriotism of anyone not wearing a flag on their lapel, and it is this kind of fake nationalism which makes Libs, Mods, and any non-hard-right-winger giggle with glee when Republicans get caught with the taint of Sin on them. When you play the Jesus card, you better walk the walk.
Look at it this way: When the Republicans stop waving the Bible around and insinuating that there is a "Real" America in which only lockstep Jesus-quoting GOPers live, maybe I'll stop laughing at their inability to color within the lines they themselves drew.

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | December 8, 2009 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Please provide (a hyperlink to) what are the "Fix's cardinal rules of politics".

I could not find Fix's cardinal rules of politics via Google.

By the way,
1) I like Majority Leader's comparison of Republican views/opposition to Health Care Reform to pro-slavery, although I think anti-civil rights would be more accurate.

2) I also like lists. What does that mean about me?

Posted by: Pete_from_nyc | December 8, 2009 11:49 AM | Report abuse

"I'm merely willing to sacrifice myself for the team"


Don't forget to wrap that rascal.


.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 8, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Margaret:

I'm merely willing to sacrifice myself for the team ;)

Posted by: Bondosan | December 8, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I don't have a problem with professional wrestling. It's not for me, but its fine. The problem is that this particular organization (WWE) is, as you pointed out, incredibly exploitative of their stars. They push steroids, to make them look impressive, and then ignore them when they are no longer profitable. To some degree, real professional sports have been guilty of this too, but they are at least trying to clean up themselves. The WWE is unapologetically disingenuous, from the product itself, to their intent to clean it up. While politicians have a nasty reputation of being liars, we at least look for the ones we can believe. How could we even pretend to believe this woman?

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

elijah24, after further thought, I think you're right. (Though I disagree that professional wrestling is bad for society in general.)

Linda McMahon's problem is that she isn't believable on social and moral issues. Republicans make a big deal about morality, so her background makes her an easy target for social conservatives. But her background would also hurt a Democratic candidate to some degree. So the head of the WWF should just stay out of politics altogether.

Posted by: Blarg | December 8, 2009 11:06 AM | Report abuse

yes, bsimon "Ayn" Paul is indeed running for the Kentucky seat of Bunning, and he is apparently the tea party's darling. Now he and Sarah in a cage match would be fun. However he is far from stupid, although he is, like his father, nuts.

"KENTUCKY: “Republican Rand Paul has become the star of the Tea Party movement that’s brewing up conservative challengers to establishment GOP candidates across the country, turning what was once a one-sided primary into a shootout for the Republican ballot line in the race to replace retiring GOP Sen. Jim Bunning,” CongressDaily’s McPike writes."

He says the problem with health care and energy and actually every other thing in country is too much government regulation, see? If only we had NO government regulations whatsoever, everything would be perfect!!!

Posted by: drindl | December 8, 2009 10:56 AM | Report abuse

No, Sue dear, it's you and your R party that are the joke. And a very bad one it is. 'Values.' -- a joke. Not very funny wht y'all did to this country, not very funny all this unemployment and financial ruin brought about by republican malfeasance and incompetence.

I was just on a conservative blog and a poll asked if Huckabee's career is over now -- 86% answered yes.

Posted by: drindl | December 8, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

"Her role as head of the WWF/WWE effectively disqualifies for her office, especially as a Republican."
==
I agree that her roll should disqualify her from office, but I don't think that is a partisan issue. People like her are bad for our culture regardless what party they represent. In other words: We wouldn't want her either.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

"In September, former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) told Catholic leaders that he was “thinking about” a run for the GOP nomination for president in 2012. “I hate to be calculating, but I see that 2012 is not just throwing somebody out to be eaten, but it’s a real opportunity for success,” he said. Today on ABC’s Top Line, Santorum appeared to be leaning more towards running. “Absolutely — absolutely taking a look,” he said, adding, “[W]e need to stand foursquare on the traditional values.” When asked if Sarah Palin — another potential GOP candidate — is qualified to be president, Santorum dodged and later took a veiled shot at the former Alaska governor:

SANTORUM: No, I’ll let the people decide that. I think, you know, she’s done a lot to draw attention to herself that’s positive. She’s done some things that, you know, certainly are going to cause her to have to do some explaining if she runs for president. "

Wait until these two rabid pit bulls start going for each other's throats. Oh, there will be blood.

Posted by: drindl | December 8, 2009 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Bondosan@9:30: Number of the Day would be 1 -- the number of posters I am really worried about, you dog!

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 8, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Politics is rendered irrelevant when "dissenters" and whistle-blowers are cruelly purged as undesirables in localities coast to coast... how a covert police state apparatus is stealing democracy at the grassroots:

SECRET MULTI-AGENCY FED PROGRAM SILENTLY TORTURES, IMPAIRS, PERSECUTES U.S. CITIZENS WITH NATIONWIDE MICROWAVE/LASER RADIATION WEAPONS SYSTEMS AND LOCAL 'COMMUNITY WATCH' VIGILANTE TERRORISM, SAYS VETERAN JOURNALIST

== DID THIS COVERT TORTURE MATRIX TARGET, INCITE FORT HOOD SHOOTER? ==

* Thousands of Americans, deemed to be "dissidents" or undesirables, targeted by Bush legacy program for debilitating microwave/laser assault, held hostage to fed-supported vigilante "community policing" stalking units, equipped with warrantless GPS devices, who vandalize and terrorize as local police look the other way.

* "Directed energy weapons," a nationwide installation employing cell towers and satellites, induce weakness, exhaustion, mood changes, head and body aches, physical and neurological impairment, strokes, aneurysms, cancer -- and many victims do not realize what is making them sick.

* Regional Homeland Security- administered "fusion centers" reportedly serve as command centers for covert electromagnetic radiation attacks, pervasive surveillance, financial sabotage of those identified as "dissidents," "trouble-makers" or slandered as threats to society.

* Use of microwave weaponry to torture and impair political opponents recently confirmed by deposed Honduras President Manuel Zelaya.

* Pleas for justice, to local police and FBI, go unanswered -- as do demands for a Department of Justice Civil Rights Division investigation and congressional hearings.

"These are crimes against humanity and the Constitution, being perpetrated under the cover of national security and 'safe streets' by multiple federal and local agencies and commands -- an American genocide hiding in plain sight, enabled by the naivete of those who think 'it can't happen here.'" -- Victor Livingston, former reporter for WTXF-TV Philadelphia, Phila. Bulletin, N.Y. Daily News, St. Petersburg Times; producer/host, MSG Network Sports Business Report; columnist, NowPublic.com/scrivener.

http://nowpublic.com/world/obama-wrong-west-point-u-s-does-torture-its-own-citizens
http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america
nowpublic.com/world/govt-tortures-me-silent-microwave-weapons-ousted-s-prez
OR (if links are corrupted / disabled): NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 8, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Baucus is a DINO, and as for "foul mouthed Al", I have a hard time caring about the opinion of republicans toward Senator Franken, since most of them voted against his anti-RAPE legislation. I don't think it takes a great man to be against rape, but it takes a pretty horrible person, or group of people to be for it.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

She is also tangently responsible for the deaths of at least 10 wrestlers from steroid and HGH use. If this was any other sport and I hesitate to characterize what WWE is involved in a sport the congressional hearings would be non-stop. BTW where is Holy Joe Lieberman.

"[Linda McMahon] will be hard to caricature as a smut peddling, steroid-encouraging business tycoon."

But that's exactly what she was. She can talk about the issues and she doesn't personally resemble a wrestler, but she still made her fortune in a business that most people find extremely distasteful. Her opponents will have hundreds of embarrassing or offensive TV clips to choose from, some of which involve Linda herself. (She was an occasional on-screen personality, though not as frequently as her husband and children.) Her role as head of the WWF/WWE effectively disqualifies for her office, especially as a Republican.

Posted by: MerrillFrank | December 8, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

CC so Reid broke one of your rules? How come these rules are only for Dems? Where was your rule at the recent DC rally with Bachman speaking? how about the 9/12 rallies with Hitler and Holcaust images? How about the amendment offered up by two GOPers about Congress getting the PO, and Dems called their bluff and signed up to co-sponser much to the GOPers chagrin? Rates right down there with you giving Palin and her "birther" remark credence. Newsflash CC, the GOP is outta power, and are in the minority, and no amount of your twisted logic and hype is going to get them back. Maybe it's not obvious to you stuck in the Beltway mind bend, but all they have been doing is obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, with glee and malice, and a total disrespect for the duly elected President. You dismiss the intelligence of the voters with this kind of "journalism", and destroy any and all credibility with partisan sludge like this. Reid put getting legislation done for the good of the country, ahead of partisan "for the good of the party". Gee, kinda like it's supposed to work. Good thing Mrs. Fix has a good job... eventually REAL journalism will return to the beltway, once it's understood that things have changed and clinging to old style models of "yellow" journalism and so-called analyses is outdated, and outta touch with reality. Yes Chris, the Prez has risked angering the media movers and shakers who typically set the conventional wisdom of a Presidency. You all screwed up with Bush so bad, yet you think the majority of the people really trust you to be objective and right? See how far that attitude will get you in the big bad world outside the Beltway.

Posted by: katem1 | December 8, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

"Sarah Palin running as a third-party candidate basically says Obama will be president until January 2017. He'd win at least 45 states in this scenario."


That candidate doesn't have to be Sarah Palin. Might be Lou Dobbs, or Glen Beck. I think Ron Paul might be too old; but what's happening with Ayn's run for office? A younger, more vigorous, more charismatic person taking Ron Paul's message to the TEA people would split the conservative vote far more effectively than Perot did.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 8, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

I won't bother to list the Democrats who's morals are nothing to look up to =just the lastest- Baucus. And foul mouth Al is such a wonderful man What a joke!

Posted by: SueG1 | December 8, 2009 10:25 AM | Report abuse

This is a good example of the kind of childish behavior R's are indulging in:

'In September, the Orlando Sentinel reported that Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) had noticed Republicans House lawmakers intentionally forgetting or losing their voting cards in order to delay votes. Starting late in the summer, Grayson said he saw 60-70 GOP congressmen engaging in this tactic:

GRAYSON: They’d all walk to the front of the House and, laughingly and jokingly, put their arms around each other’s shoulder like it was some kind of clownish fun. And they did this over and over to make sure every vote took half an hour. That’s how low things have gotten. I could give you countless examples just like that. They’re simply obstructionists and there’s nothing you can do about it.'

Posted by: drindl | December 8, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

' I imagine a lot of people initially thought the same things about Arnold Schwarzenegger and Al Franken.'

Neither one of them were digusting smut/ porn peddlers, though.

Funny how most of the adulterers, pornographers, and pedophiles prefer the 'family values' party.

Thou dost protesteth too much I guess.

Posted by: drindl | December 8, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Dear Santa,
My Christmas list is short and sweet this year:

Santorum/Palin 2012.

This would be a great ticket...the Super-right that choked on the McCain nom as being way too centrist would get their hard right dream ticket, the Tea Baggers and Birthers would get to cheer their pageant winner again, and the rich white boy faction would get another in a long line of rich white Republican boys to make a run at the WH. What's in it for the rest of us?
We get to keep BHO for another four years.
It's win-win. So, Santa, remember what a good boy I've been all year long and please stick this under my tree. Come through on this, and I'll forgive you for never delivering on the Red Rider BB gun I wanted when I was a kid.
Sincerely,
DG

Posted by: DAMNEDGENTLEMEN | December 8, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

"Given that, and the unpredictability she demonstrated in her stunning decision to resign as governor over the summer, no potential avenue to the presidency should be ruled out."

This is how dumbed down politics has gotten in this country -- that this woman has 'demonstrated unpredictability' by quitting her job, so that means she should run for president.

We truly live in an idiocracy.

Posted by: drindl | December 8, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

jaxas -- even someone like Barry Goldwater, who voted against the Civil Rights Act on what apparently (although there is a bit of question) were non-racist, purely conservative grounds, would not be welcome in today's GOP because he was firmly AGAINST the federal government getting involved in abortion.

mwhoke's post, like Rush Limbaugh, is a joke. You see that nonsense all the time on WaPo boards.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | December 8, 2009 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Koolkat, I have heard this argument on the 1964 Civil Rights Act made by Limbaugh on his radio program. But, he studiously avoided telling his dimwitted audience of dumbed down dittoheads that indeed--just as you said--they type of republican who voted for that legislation no longer exists by dint of the Limbaugh right taking over the party.

Does Limbaugh or any other conservative expect us to actually believe that someone like Jacob Javits or Nelson Rockefeller would be welcome in today's GOP? The rank dishonesty and ignorance of conservatives is exemplified in mwhoke's comments. History, reality and empirical data is not something they care all that much for.

Posted by: jaxas | December 8, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin running as a third-party candidate basically says Obama will be president until January 2017. He'd win at least 45 states in this scenario.

What will the Republican establishment do to stop Palin in her (moose) tracks?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | December 8, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

I was impressed with Hoyer's speech as well. Imagine the material the democrats could come up with. Throughout the Bush era, Rush Limbaugh's consistent template was that the democrats were "invested in failure", referring to the Iraq war. Today it is Limbaugh who is leading the republican effort to ensure that President Obama and by extension America fails in whatever he tries to do.

Limbaugh admits that he is invested in failure.

Posted by: jaxas | December 8, 2009 9:38 AM | Report abuse

The Democrats have nothing to fear from Republicans, least of all the Palin people, but they do have some serious structural problems with how they are putting together the jobs problem/solution, upon which so much depends

[Sorry to WCWilliams, we wish it were about

a red wheel
barrow

glazed with rain
water

beside the white
chickens...

but, people have to work to have a wheelbarrow in order to paint it red.)

Consumer credit is not going to drive spending, not this time. There is plenty of money to lend now, the problem is the dearth of qualified borrowers, or qualified borrower confidence.

Simply, no one will borrow a lot of money right now to create or buy something no one may buy from them at a profit.

Sustainable job growth is a fundamental problem, it is not just a matter of time. It is a matter of innovation.


Posted by: shrink2 | December 8, 2009 9:34 AM | Report abuse

mwhoke: "I am showing my age but it was the Republicans that provided the necessary votes to pass the Civil Rights Act in 1965 after a large bloc of Democrats refused to vote for the legislation.

My history books show that it was the Republicans who led the way in 1861 to the opposition of slavery and the Democrats who supported the institution of slavery.

I guess that Harry Reid owes someone an apology."

I don't know if you're showing your age but you are showing you got a poor education.

The kind of Republicans who voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (not 1965) and opposed slavery NO LONGER EXIST. Those were LIBERAL positions. Strongly liberal. The conservative position was to support the maintenance of slavery in the states that wanted to do so and to oppose the Civil Rights Act as an unconstitutional expansion of federal power.

Do you not understand this? This is not rocket science.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | December 8, 2009 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Good lord, AndyR3 -- what makes you think that Capuano -- or anyone else in his/her right mind -- would want to be Governor of the Commonwealth? It's become, I think, the most thankless job you can have in this state. The Legislature can kneecap you by easily overriding vetoes; it's your fault if anything goes wrong, even if the situation was caused by someone else or is simply due to matters beyond your control (like the national economy); and the local media is merciless. If he doesn't win today (and disclaimer -- I'm voting for him), he still has a leadership position in the House and an absolutely safe district.

As for Scott Brown -- he'll get his 35% or so in the general election.

Posted by: SGfromMudville | December 8, 2009 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I would personally sleep with Sarah Palin (and believe me, that's a gift worth having!) if she'd promise to run for president as a third party candidate! ;)

Posted by: Bondosan | December 8, 2009 9:30 AM | Report abuse

30 teams? Not bad given that it was in direct conflict with Fadò. You've got my head, CC, but the Quiz Mistress has my heart.

I heard McCain going on about Reid's remarks on the drive home last night. Reid would have done far better to compare this with the formation of social security, Medicare, or Medicaid. I'm not sure why this should play at all in Nevada.

Well, I'm off to listen to the Afghanistan hearing. Should be interesting with Eikenberry opposing the surge and not informing McChrystal about it.

BTW - Can't resist getting in an early dig on number of the day. 63. Percentage of Americans who view global warming as a serious threat. I think it's a new Quinnipac survey.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 8, 2009 9:29 AM | Report abuse

"[Linda McMahon] will be hard to caricature as a smut peddling, steroid-encouraging business tycoon."

But that's exactly what she was. She can talk about the issues and she doesn't personally resemble a wrestler, but she still made her fortune in a business that most people find extremely distasteful. Her opponents will have hundreds of embarrassing or offensive TV clips to choose from, some of which involve Linda herself. (She was an occasional on-screen personality, though not as frequently as her husband and children.) Her role as head of the WWF/WWE effectively disqualifies for her office, especially as a Republican.

Posted by: Blarg | December 8, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

I'm not sure how much credence one can give to Sarah Palin's implications that she might run for president as a third-party candidate in 2012. To me, it sounds less serious consideration and more like another effort in her current campaign to cast herself as an independent thinker who represents conservatism more than she represents the Republican party. The optimistic view would be that she wants to encourage the GOP to stick to its conservative guns so it can have her -- easily the Republican candidate with the most name recognition -- as its nominee in 2012; the pessimistic view would be that appearing to be a non-establishment voice makes her a more marketable commodity in the book-and-TV-appearance punditry circuit. Pick one of two.

Rick Santorum as a presidential candidate would be interesting to watch if neither Palin nor Mike Huckabee decides to run in 2012, but I doubt neither of those candidates will field a serious bid. Palin could conceivably decide she likes being a pundit more than she'd like being president, but no way is Huckabee's current mess going to derail his plans. Voters have short memories, and although I'm sure the issue will come up in the primaries, it won't be enough to make him decide not to run. Barring a more serious setback -- like a major scandal or health issue -- Huckabee is definitely headed for the Republican primary in 2012.

I'm guessing Chris's being impressed with Linda McMahon's political savvy is part of the normal reaction anyone has when a celebrity candidate turns out to actually know what he or she is talking about, at least to some extent. I imagine a lot of people initially thought the same things about Arnold Schwarzenegger and Al Franken.

Posted by: GJonahJameson | December 8, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Mass. is not very efficient and believes that the only issues of any consequence are those that would politically be of $$$$ advantage. I have written to Senator John Kerry's office several times regarding PUPPY MILLS IN OXFORD, MASS. and the Boston Globe's undercover team 5 pinpointed Laughlin Kennel plus the Worcester Telegram showed truck driver from Mo. delivering half dead puppies. He was arrested. Mass USDA could do nothing for me, but since the Pup I purchased went over state line with Giardia parisite FedUSDA and others took charge. I received full refund, but state laws must be changed to protect these creatures from Mass. criminals hiding behind state licenses as pet shops. Mass USDA asked me how I did it? Worked 6 months. I am 83 yrs old, very ill and 3-1/2 hours from Oxford. Your atty. general who wants to be Senator is a fake out as far as I am concerned!

Posted by: LOONYBIN2000 | December 8, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Harry Reid would do better to remind voters of the GOP in the 1930s, and how FDR's Four Republican Horsemen of the Apocalypse still ride through the Halls of Congress. FDR called them Destruction, Delay, Deceit and Despair and we are seeing them all these days. The GOP playbook is as bereft of new ideas as their platform is.

The Grand Old Party of Nothing.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 8, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

mwhoke: the classic mistake you are making is assuming that the Republican party of today is the same as the GOP of 1861 or even 1961. It is not. The Democrats who tried to obstruct Civil Rights in 1965 are ALL now Republicans (except for Byrd, who saw the error of his ways). The Southern Strategy of Nixon turned all those dixiecrats into Republicans.

The hard truth is that Democrats of today would have been Radical Republicans in the 1860s, and TR Republicans at the turn of the 20th century. Democrats back then used to stand for slavery, segregation, and racism. The parties have simply switched places.

I agree with elijah24 that Reid was talking about conservatives in general, who today are Republicans. In the 1800s, they were Democrats. Reid owes no one an apology.

Posted by: jacecil | December 8, 2009 9:04 AM | Report abuse

AndyR3: Good call on Capuano.

Reid may have simply decided he's going to take one for the team on health care reform and let the chips fall where they may. Like any dedicated gambler with a short stack needing one card to complete his flush after the turn he's going all in and hoping that the economy improves enough next year to reverse his current fortunes.

If Palin runs in the Republican primary it will trigger a bloody intramural battle for control of the Republican party that will may tear the party apart. If she runs as an independent candidate, she will tear the Republican party apart. Perhaps, considering how the Republican establishment treated (and continues to treat) her, that's her goal?

Posted by: Gallenod | December 8, 2009 8:44 AM | Report abuse

There is hope that the good people of Massachusetts will do the right thing and send Scott Brown to DC. We do not need another tax and borrow big union representative spending us into the stone-age.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | December 8, 2009 8:39 AM | Report abuse

There is hope that the good people of Massachusetts will do the right thing and send Scott Brown to DC. We do not need another tax and borrow big union representative spending us into the stone-age.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | December 8, 2009 8:39 AM | Report abuse

"(Palin)represents normal America (not the "smart" people"
==
Well i agree that she doesn’t represent the smart people, but I don’t grant your premise that she represents "normal America." The movement against Dems was predictable, and equally predictable is the fact that it is primarily made up of conservatives who never would have supported the president or Dems in congress anyway. The people spoke very clearly a year ago when they threw the GOP out of Washington. Is there some buyer remorse? Probably, but not to the degree that that a '94esque reversal of last year will take place. And if Palin is your best hope for recovering the White House, you should resign yourself to the words "President Barack Obama", because you'll be hearing them until 2017.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 8:36 AM | Report abuse

There is hope that the good people of Massachusetts will do the right thing and send Scott Brown to DC. We do not need another tax and borrow big union representative spending us into the stone-age.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | December 8, 2009 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Palin will run (and she should). Her political views are what we need to turn this country around. I know that liberals hate her, but the reality is that she represents normal America (not the "smart" people who think they know everything in Washington). Contrary to the mainstream media's characterization, her book laid out in detail her political views. I plan on supporting her and know many people who will. Also, democrats are going to lost huge in 2010. I know the media loves liberals so it won't do real reporting, but you can get the sense that people are very unhappy with how democrats are trying their best to destroy our prosperity (with cap and trade, health care, increased taxes and regulation, etc.).

Posted by: columbiaheights | December 8, 2009 8:19 AM | Report abuse

mwhoke, I haven’t heard Reids exact words, but I would bet that he meant conservatives stood in the way. Not republicans. The Republican Party of today is what the Democrats were at the time of slavery: a mostly regional party of status quo. Even in the 60s, the parties were mostly big-tent (those were the days). Today of course, the GOP is demanding ideological purity, which drastically reduces their numbers, and shows them to be the elitists, that they like to accuse us of being. But their elitism is based on what passes in conservative circles as "morals", rather than education, or, y'know, concern for their constituencies.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 8:09 AM | Report abuse

mwhoke, I haven’t heard Reids exact words, but I would bet that he meant conservatives stood in the way. Not republicans. The Republican Party of today is what the Democrats were at the time of slavery: a mostly regional party of status quo. Even in the 60s, the parties were mostly big-tent (those were the days). Today of course, the GOP is demanding ideological purity, which drastically reduces their numbers, and shows them to be the elitists, that they like to accuse us of being. But their elitism is based on what passes in conservative circles as "morals", rather than education, or, y'know, concern for their constituencies.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 8, 2009 8:09 AM | Report abuse

Thinking she has a shot at the GOP nomination in 2012 is bad enough. Palin is truly delusional if she believes a third-party run is viable. Her base is not that big, contrary to her own inflated and egotistical reports.

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

Posted by: parkerfl1 | December 8, 2009 8:04 AM | Report abuse

I am showing my age but it was the Republicans that provided the necessary votes to pass the Civil Rights Act in 1965 after a large bloc of Democrats refused to vote for the legislation.

My history books show that it was the Republicans who led the way in 1861 to the opposition of slavery and the Democrats who supported the institution of slavery.

I guess that Harry Reid owes someone an apology.

Posted by: mwhoke | December 8, 2009 7:32 AM | Report abuse

I think Hoyer's speech is the beginning salvo in the 2010 election series. The GOP will make an argument that 1) the democrats haven't done anything and 2) that one party rule is bad for the country.

The democrats will counter the first point by 1) passing healthcare reform in some form, 2) passing a bipartisan climate change bill, 3) changing Bank regulations, and 4) pointing out that the stimulus worked and that we are climbing out of the recession.
To counter the other argument they will use Hoyer's blueprint to make the argument that one part rule may not be the best, but the other option is worse.

The success of this strategy will rely on the state of the economy in July or August. If, as I have said before, unemployment is down to below 8% by this summer than the Democrats will clean house. If on the other hand the unemployment numbers are around 9% in August then the GOP will gain 20 seats or so in the House, and 1-2 seats in the senate.

Posted by: AndyR3 | December 8, 2009 6:40 AM | Report abuse

On the Massachusetts senate vote, I wonder if Capuano is setting himself up for a bid at Governor. Deval Patrick doesn't have a chance of getting relected right now and Capuano may use his increased statewide name recognition now to take him out in the primaries.

Also lets go over the GOP want-to-bes that you mention in this article. Rick Santorum should be put in a sanitorium if he thinks for one second that he can win the GOP nod much less the White House. Palin is openly talking about a third party run (don't worry though she'll quit before it really gets going to not write her next book). And lastly, the co CEO of WWE. Which CC seems to be impressed by, what did she do put you in a figure-four until you wrote the article? If McMahon wins then Chris Dodd will win relection with 60% of the vote.
On top of all that. The Unemployment rate for December went down .2% and it is bewing forecast the labor market will increase by 6% next quarter. Not looking good for the GOPs prospects 11 months from now, much less 3 years.

Posted by: AndyR3 | December 8, 2009 6:25 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company