Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

How will John Paul Stevens retirement affect the midterms?

The announcement by Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens that he will retire this summer amounts to a blot-out-the-sun moment in the political world -- an event that will dominate news coverage for several months (at a minimum) and almost certainly play some role in how the two parties position themselves in advance of the November midterms.

Since the Stevens retirement is only a few hours old, the political reverberations are just starting to be felt. But, at first glance, here are a few of our thoughts about the impact of a Court fight this spring and summer.

* A base bump: No issue energizes the base of the Republican party like a Court opening. And, given that President Barack Obama is almost certain to nominate someone who the GOP base won't be particularly happy with, you can expect the right -- already riled up over health care -- to grow even more so as this process moves forward. Remember that base intensity is one of -- if not the -- most critical elements of electoral success in midterm elections, which are, traditionally, lower turnout affairs. The question is whether Democrats can use the Stevens opening to rally and motivate their own base as well. Democrats believe that health care -- despite all of the sturm und drang that surrounded it -- ultimately will benefit them at the ballot box this fall because it energized what had been a un-enthusiastic party base. Can they pull the same trick with the Court vacancy? Look to the White House to lean heavily on Organizing for America, the organization built to harness the grassroots power of Obama's campaign, to try and rally the base in support of his nominee -- and keep that energy up heading into the fall campaign.

* Wither health care: As we mentioned above, a Supreme Court vacancy draws attention like few other things in political Washington. There will be scads of "who will he pick" stories followed by thousands of "what do we know about who he picked" pieces and then, of course, the panoply of process stories about the confirmation process itself. All of that coverage means far less room for stories about the selling of the health care bill to the American public. At first glance, that's a problem for Democrats since national polling suggests that opposition to the bill is outstripping support today.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

* Follow the money: Court fights traditionally feature a bevy of television ads funded by liberal and conservative groups in support/opposition to the nominee. With any number of committees being built and pointed toward the 2010 midterms -- the conservative American Crossroads being just one example -- the question is how much money is diverted to the court fight and whether there is enough in the coffers of these campaign-oriented organizations to make them not just relevant but powerful in the fall.

*Citizens United: The Court is often regarded -- even by some of the most active political actors -- as somewhat removed from the daily political debate. But, the Citizens United ruling earlier this year, which opened the door for unlimited corporate contributions to organizations that can then directly advocate for the election or defeat of candidates, has direct relevance to the fall campaign even before the Stevens opening. Stevens' retirement means that the Citizens United ruling -- an issue the President thought enough of to mention in his State of the Union speech -- will be front and center for the foreseeable future. We are always skeptical that campaign finance issues matter to the public but if ever they will impact the electorate the next few months is the time.

By Chris Cillizza  |  April 9, 2010; 3:15 PM ET
Categories:  Politics and the Court  | Tags: Barack Obama, John Paul Stevens, Supreme Court of the United States  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bart Stupak to retire
Next: Haley Barbour's growing influence

Comments

Hillary has always wanted to make her mark on U.S. history. She thought she could do it as the first female president. However, Supreme Court justices have the power to leave a greater and longer impression on U.S. history as their decisions can last for generations, until overturned.

With her intelligence and vast understanding of mainstream America she is a perfect fit for the high court. I think
she's tired of flying around the world trying to put out fires with world leaders and would gladly settle for a job that ensures job security until she is ready to retire.

If Bader-Gingsberg were to retire next, there would be only one female on the court. Plus Stevens is the only non-Catholic and non-Jewish memeber of the court.

It would be nice to see how three women will make a difference on the opinions issued by the court.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | April 12, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

THE ROBERTS COURT IS DISMANTLING CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS
What right has the Republicans to tell President Obama who he should choose to be Supreme Court Justice! The Republicans already have six Republican Justices on the Supreme Court Bench. The Alliance for Justice analyzed Supreme Court decisions during the 2008-2009 year. It revealed the aggressive and unrelenting ultra-conservative activism of Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Alito, Thomas, Scalia and Kennedy.

The Supreme Court under Roberts has reinterpreted Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to allow small jurisdictions to escape its requirements. The Section requires covered jurisdictions to preclear all voting changes with the Department of Justice.

Since 1971, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits disparate impacts. The statute has been effective in desegregating police and fire departments. The Roberts Court has reinterpreted Title VII to make it easier to get rid of it next time round.
The intention of Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy is to deny African-Americans their hard won rights and freedoms and re-establish school segregation/ and Jim Crow laws, especially in the Southern States.

Posted by: stephendelsol | April 12, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Noacoler should get out of there as fast as possible.

==

Soon as I finish pinching a loaf I'm outa here. For breakfast and coffee. Please don't rush me.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Governor McDonnell came up with a new one: he wants to require felons to write an essay in order to get their voting rights back

==

Distraction. McDonnell should resign in disgrace, go home, and slit his goddamn wrists. Of course IRL he doesn't get what the fuss is about and thinks it's all about violating PC. Way to go, Virginia, electing a Law School for Dummies hick who thinks blacks should reach career apothesosis as caddies and waiters.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Governor McDonnell came up with a new one: he wants to require felons to write an essay in order to get their voting rights back

==

Distraction. McDonnell should resign in disgrace, go home, and slit his goddamn wrists. Of course IRL he doesn't get what the fuss is about and thinks it's all about violating PC. Way to go, Virginia, electing a Law School for Dummies hick who thinks blacks should reach career apothesosis as caddies and waiters.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Governor McDonnell came up with a new one: he wants to require felons to write an essay in order to get their voting rights back.


My only question:


DOES THE ESSAY HAVE TO BE ON THE CIVIL WAR ???

.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Chris:


Is there anything we can do with this HATE SPEECH by broadwayjoe at 12:48. It really is out of hand.

And to broadwayjoe - all these people following the democratic talking points are wrong, and they are inflaming the situation in this country. You can add all the ultra-liberals to that list, it doesn't make them right.

.


Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

I think Clinton is much happier being out in the world than trapped in the parochial backwater the US is becoming.

Posted by: drindl | April 10, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

@shrink - Perceptive comment. Early on, I decided that HRC would be a solid president. Had made a lot of connections on Capitol Hill and wouldn't repeat WJC's mistakes. Savvy and solid. BHO as inspiring, but inexperienced and likelier to make a serious mistake. He struck while the iron was white hot and proved the better campaigner (at least long enough that the nomination was decided by the time Clinton caught onto how to challenge Obama).

Personally, I've taken some significant leaps (to the UK for a job, back to the US for personal reasons, to DC to get back into the profession).

I could easily see HRC on the court, but she's too important in her job right now. After 20 years on the trapeze, she deserves a break. We'll see how it works out.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | April 10, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

It's Model Mayhem, noa. Specializing in S&M and other fetishes.

"A new party is urgently needed today because the leaders of the two existing parties, Democrat and Republican, have deserted the principles and traditions of our nation's founding fathers. Both of the existing parties have become the proponents of big government, crushing taxation, dictatorial federal power, waste and fiscal irresponsibility, unwholesome and disastrous internationalism, compromise with our nation's enemies, and authoritarian regimentation of the citizens of this Republic. Control of the government, under the domination of these two existing parties, has left the hands of the people our government was created to serve."

Has a familiar ring, doesn't it? Newt Gingrich, perhaps?

Nah, George Wallace, 1968... the roots of the teabagger 'movement'

Actually, more closely resembling a bowel movement than anything else.

Posted by: drindl | April 10, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

@the fake 37:

The baggers have been called out as racist ultraviolent fools by many MSMers, including several of Fix's coworkers at the Post. Providing links to the dozens of articles connecting these mentals to white nationalist and white supremacist groups I'm sure would serve no purpose since you don't want the truth on this racist proxy movement. We have all had quite enough of their spitting on black congressmen, terrifying Congressman Frank, and waving misspelled n-word signs.

34, 35, 36, __, 38, 39,...

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 10, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

We're hopin' BHO doesn't go with the usual suspects. Hillary, Harold Koh, and Deval Patrick would all be game changers and make history.

Re JakeD/JakeD2s new handle "Captain Zero," I like it but am curious about its origins. Is Jake saying he is zero, i.e., nothing, a nullity? If so, I like it even more.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 10, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Rep Steven Cohen (D TN) is talking about the Tea Party Movement.


He says that the Tea Party is not "diverse."

The implication of what he is saying is this - FOR A GROUP OF AMERICANS TO BE ABLE TO VOICE A LEGITIMATE OPINION, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A BUNCH OF BLACKS IN THE CROWD WITH THEM.


If they don't have blacks with them, then their opinions are NOT LEGITIMATE.


As far as I see, there is no requirement in the First Amendment to have "diversity" in any assembly of Americans.


Rep. Cohen deserves HARSH WORDS for getting on national television and saying things like this.

Rep. Cohen is a DISGRACE TO OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT -


AND COHEN IS A DISGRACE TO OUR SYSTEM WHICH STATES THAT INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS TAKE PRECENDENCE OVER GOVERNMENT POWERS.

What Rep. Cohen said is UNAMERICAN.

If Rep. Cohen does not want to respect the rights of AMERICANS TO EXERCISE THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, HE SHOULD RESIGN IMMEDIATELY.


Statements like those from Rep. Cohen are INFLAMING THE SITUATION, NOT HELPING THE SITUATION.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Shrink2

Coming from a socialist like you, you might be offended by such concerns, but they are real.


Noacoler should get out of there as fast as possible.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Kids got new skis with the REI dividend and oh what a day of Spring skiing it is going to be on Mt Hood!

FB, in re Clinton for the court, now v. later, it comes down to a difference between our basic beliefs about change I think. I am a strike while the iron is hot, because you never know about what might happen two years from now, take the plunge, no regrets type. You seem more sanguine, life in the long view, strategic planner and so on. I am not saying I am impulsive, nor that you are courting disaster by missing a window of opportunity. But we see the exact same conditions and have come to different conclusions about timing. It is fun to think about.

Say Noa, looks like we are having fun in the sun, though you already lived through the day I am just starting.

Terrible about the Polish government plane crash, the list of the deceased is a who is who of their government. 37th, could you please show some respect? Paranoid commie jokes? Moron.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 10, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Noacoler


If you are in Nam right now, you should get out as soon as you can. The Polish President and many high Polish government officials were just killed in a plane crash in Russia.

You should get out of there as fast as you can.

Sounds like they might close the border so get out as soon as you can.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

OHIOCITIZEN


Is that how you make your case ? By calling half the country a name ?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Since nurturing hatred is the only thing keeping you going, zouk etc., allow me to help. Get a pad and paper.

* geckoes chirping on the celing

* coconut husks drying in the sun

* upscale outdoor restaurants where a to-die-for meal for two sets one back about $5

* while-you-wait jewelry repair including additional gold for a total of $1.50.

You'll want to add these to "air conditioned gyms" as things to seethe about.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Just imagine.

In addition to posting frantically here all day, zouk/drivel/moonbat/comrade0/many others has to visit National Review, Drudge, and a bunch of other fever swamp sites, collect and collate pithy screeds, follow links for more pithy screeds, gather and collate and edit, and then post and post and post.

Leaving scarcely any time to beg for attention from narcissistic women on model mania.

That's some uh "life" you have there, shutterbug.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 7:59 AM | Report abuse

Poor lonely Ped.

Posted by: Moonbat | April 10, 2010 7:34 AM | Report abuse

TO: MR. PRESIDENT OBAMA
FROM: Interested Citizen

Please, oh please, submit as your next Supreme Court nominee Professor Goodwin Liu. He shares your values, he represents the downtrodden, the least-possessed, he stands against privelege. In short, MR PRESIDENT, he stands for the ideals of equality enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution in which both you and I believe. Nominate him to the Supreme Court and watch the conservative dirtbags squirm.

Posted by: OHIOCITIZEN | April 10, 2010 5:17 AM | Report abuse

Poor JohnGalt is so pathetic he cites his own sad-sack blog for his election fantasies.

==

What do you expect from a guy who names himself after a character in one of the dreariest novels ever written?

I never so much as pencilled in the margins of a book before "Atlas," which I consigned to the fireplace, face down, to make sure I never tried to read it again. What absolute tripe.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 4:28 AM | Report abuse

12B I don't know if you know this but 37th is a small group of 'volunteers' dedicated to well, spamming the message. So they can't figure out how "we" could all be saying "the same thing" if we were not in a more or less similar arrangement and or setting. Further, this endless bleating about our getting paid is envy, a sign they wish they were.

==

More projection. The wingers just don't get that we don't have anyone like Limbaugh or Beck to tell us what to say and think, that we all arrive at our own ideas independently. This does not compute, Will Robinson; don't forget, they all copy and paste from the fever swamps, there are only about a dozen conservatives in the world who can write a coherent sentence without flying off the handle with how much they hate X or Y, and maybe a third that many who can form anything like a simple argument.

In WingerLand, George Will is an intellectual and Glenn Beck is a scholar.

Sorry, goons, but we don't have anyone sending us Talking Point Of The Day emails like you subliterates have.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 4:20 AM | Report abuse

BO is going to pick a neocom statist. There, I went out on a limb.

==

what the hell is a "neocom statist?"

any special reason you knucklewalkers have to invent your own special little neologisms?

(slaps forehead)

oh, of course, there are no extant words for the things you hate, because they do't actually exist. So I guess a neocom statist is something like a sphinx, chimera, or unicorn.

Or an honest Republican.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 10, 2010 4:11 AM | Report abuse

A BASE BUMP -- IF OBAMA FINALLY MOVES TO RESTORE CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND TAKE DOWN BUSH-CHENEY PROGRAMS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION

A base bump -- great turn of phrase. Coming off the perceived health care victory, Obama may finally get to reassure his base that he has not been entrained by the courtesans of the dark side to do their bidding as a Bushie automaton in progressive garb.

Deeds matter, not words. President Obama and VP Biden MUST move -- personally and forcefully --against an extrajudicial targeting and torture "matrix" that has made a mockery of due process and the rule of law...

...a bureaucratic gestapo devised and still overseen by rogue leave-behinds to conduct what amounts to an ideologically-driven slow-kill microwave genocide:

***

ATTENTION OBAMA WHITE HOUSE (c/o Gibbs, Axelrod, Emanuel, Jarrett)

Take Down Extrajudicial "Torture Matrix" Before GOP Blames YOU for Bush-Cheney Atrocities

HOW COVERT U.S. 'OPS' DEAL WITH POLITICAL 'DISSIDENTS?'

VIC LIVINGSTON REPORTS: "Heinous directed energy weapon "no-touch" microwave torture on extrajudicially 'targeted' American citizens."

ATTENTION JOHN BRENNAN / DENNIS BLAIR:

READ A JOURNALIST'S FIRST-PERSON ACCOUNT OF HOW YOUR 'PROGRAMS' ARE DESTROYING THE LIVES AND LIVELIHOODS OF UNCONSTITUTIONALLY AND UNJUSTLY TARGETED AMERICANS.

See latest comments:

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-govt-uses-cbs-news-cover-microwave-cell-tower-torture
http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR NowPublic.com/scrivener

IF YOU ARE AWARE AND DO NOTHING, YOU ARE COMPLICIT.

Posted by: scrivener50 | April 10, 2010 1:40 AM | Report abuse

Obama's issue is not really with the TEA PARTY MOVEMENT - Obama's issue is the the American People who do not agree with his policies.

Obama has made an error about who his fight is with.

The American People do NOT want Obama's high taxes and Obama's massive government program - there are many people committed to de-funding the implementation of that program - and ultimately REPEALING IT.

For Obama and the democrats to start with FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM - WHICH IS A RACE CARD THEY HAVE PLAYED SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS - and then move on to threats of intimation, the country would be right to be angry with Obama over his tactics, as well as his policies.


Obama is making mistakes - and he is making the kinds of mistakes which DEFINE HIM - and those are horrible to shake.

Obama appears to be unconcerned with the democrats running downticket this fall - this is a serious mistake.

Stupak leaving the Congress today really brings these issues to a strong point - if there was no other democrat that Obama NEEDED to pass his health care plan, Obama NEEDED Stupak - Obama simply did NOT have the votes without Stupak -

But in getting Stupak, Obama lost Stupak.

IN GETTING STUPAK, OBAMA LOST STUPAK.

That puts it clearly - it really is what everyone has been telling Obama and his pals for months - since October - in order to get health care through, Obama would have to sacrifice the moderate democrats - which is UNACCEPTABLE.

At least it is unacceptable to rational pols - to people who want to run their party correctly - and to people who don't want to lose the next election.

Obama has decided to go against all that - and sacrifice large numbers of officeholders in his own party - something they are NOT going to be happy about.


Stupak wasn't happy today.

Obama got Stupak's vote, but he lost Stupak.

Obama got his health care vote through, but he LOST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN THE PROCESS.

Was it worth it ???


Obama would have been wise to drop the health care bill in January WHEN HE HAD THE CHANCE AND THE PERFECT EXCUSE.

Now Obama has lost the American People - the American People do NOT want the massive taxes and the massive government program.

Who is in control - the democrats or the people ????

The democrats have confused things - Obama and the democrats think that they are in charge -


Ultimately the American People govern the country - and they decide what happens.

The American People do not want the program.

Stupak, who voted FOR the bill, is on his way out - and he isn't coming back.

Symbolically, Obama lost the majority of the American People in the same way - AND THEY AREN'T COMING BACK.

.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 1:21 AM | Report abuse

Well, given that W appointed a young Chief Justice, it'd be a longshot for HRC to get that post. My assumptions are that she plays a key role as SoS and it would also be a tacit admission of error to appoint here to the SCOTUS after little more than a year. [You can tell I've been assimilated by the DoD when I start speaking in acronyms.] Second, it's unusual for someone to serve as SoS for more than 4 years. It happens (Schultz, Dulles), but 4 years is the limit for most.

So, assuming that Sec. Clinton leaves office by 2012, what might be next? Yes, yes. The right is certain the Obama loses reelection, but then there was that permanent majority and all. There are certainly gender issues to consider. From the speculation that I've read, the leading contenders are women. If a third vacancy did arise, would there be a problem picking three women in a row? Of course, it didn't seem a problem for W and his father to only pick men. Given that women make a slight majority of the population, I don't consider it a bad thing that at least ONE branch of government represent that. Anyway, I think that Sec. Clinton is such a nationally known figure that those issues would fade away. Plus, you get away from the issue of only picking appellate judges.

So, I come to the conclusion that she'd be a strong contender. Next time.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | April 10, 2010 1:12 AM | Report abuse

I don't believe Obama has much to gain by having a Court fight this summer - his calculations should cause him to be more conciliatory - but hey - Obama completely inflamed the situation in the past few months - to the point of appearing to attempt to spark a racial confrontation on Capitol Hill.

Normally Congressmen avoid the protests on Capitol Hill - even the friendly ones.

There are other routes to the Capitol - THERE IS NO DOUBT IN ANYONE'S MIND THAT THE CONGRESSMEN PURPOSELY WALKED IN FRONT OF THE CROWD - PERHAPS TO PURPOSELY SPARK A RACIAL INCIDENT.

The point is clear: the democrats were trying to PROVOKE A RACIAL INCIDENT.

This brings up interesting questions of who is at fault - AND WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INFLAMING THE SITUATION.

These questions are important -

ESPECIALLY IN THE LIGHT OF THE FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM WHICH JUST WENT ON AND ON AND ON


It must be said that 2 weeks later, Chris Matthews says he has an answering machine message (which could have been left by anyone) - the person on the machine could have been black -

However - for all the insistence of the democrats of a HORRIBLE RACIAL INCIDENT - all the democrats really have is an answering machine message which could have been left by a black person - but should have just been erased by a mature person who would not take offense by someone getting angry over the telephone.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 1:04 AM | Report abuse

Shrink2


It is interesting how the Hillary thing has played out - on one hand a Supreme Court nomination looked far-off last year - and uncertain.

But now she is Secretary of State - she may want to stay there. And the situation with her in that position is not what it was last year - with no one knowing how it would work out. Everyone knows how it would work out.

Also, maybe the Republicans would be more inclined toward filibustering Hillary than another nominee.

I predict that Obama will not pick a fight and the nominee with end up with 75-85 votes FOR.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Ok, I suspected but now we know where JakeD went, just look at this NYT byline, "As the wealthy slowly resume buying, business creeps back for yachts, jets, jewelry and other luxury goods."

As I lay me down to sleep, two minutes from now, I'll be thinking, Oh...to be wealthy, buying yachts, jets, jewelry and other luxury goods. Then I'd be happy, if only...

Posted by: shrink2 | April 10, 2010 12:44 AM | Report abuse

johngait


There are 33 Senate races this year - I haven't had time to review all the polling data that you say is correct. However, the democrats are on thin ice for the elections this fall - I don't think people realize the real situation.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 10, 2010 12:43 AM | Report abuse

Ok FB, sorry, tonight I just have tiny time to post.

Very quick, you made all my points as to why, but as to when, I think it is a matter of now, so not risk never. If that is not true, no problem.

If it is true, who cares how she did as BHO's SoS?

We agree, she is the better half and we have never seen her in clean air. If Chief Justice is the goal, what is the safest means to that end?

Posted by: shrink2 | April 10, 2010 12:27 AM | Report abuse

Wikipedia editor bashes retiring Justice Stevens as gay, queer -- http://tinyurl.com/jps-gay

Posted by: brykupono | April 10, 2010 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Wikipedia editor bashes retiring Justice Stevens as gay, queer

Posted by: brykupono | April 10, 2010 12:22 AM | Report abuse

I see a great career for JohnGalt9 in cherry picking. For example, the latest polling in Fisher vs. Portman has Portman down 5. RobbingAmerica doesn't bother citing any sources or giving links. Typical for the right wing bloggerati.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | April 9, 2010 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Don't be surprised if racist white and America--hater Barack Obama names Jerimiah Wright Jr. or Louis Farrakhan to replace John Paul Stevens.

Posted by: armpeg | April 9, 2010 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Poor JohnGalt is so pathetic he cites his own sad-sack blog for his election fantasies.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | April 9, 2010 11:13 PM | Report abuse

Poor JohnGalt is so pathetic he cites his own sad-sack blog for his election fantasies.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | April 9, 2010 11:13 PM | Report abuse

How would Clinton become Chief Justice? Wouldn't Roberts have to retire?

Posted by: DDAWD | April 9, 2010 10:57 PM | Report abuse

The Election 2010 shock that the media is not reporting.

The daily polls of the 22 Senate races at http://www.robbingamerica.com show a landslide on the making:
22 Senate races being reported now; winning 18 Republicans, 3 Democrats, and 1 tie.
See for yourselves.

Their fine piece called "The Self-Deluding Presidency - Why it will fail" makes an excellent case that is Obama himself that will give Conservatives their victory in November.

Posted by: JohnGalt9 | April 9, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

I should make it clear that I am a total Hillary fanboy. I got excited about her long before Obama (I was hoping she'd win and Obama would be the Veep). Anyway, those discussions are long past.

Sec. Clinton plays a crucial role in this administration. If the plan were to nominate her for the Supreme Court, she never would have been made SoS. Several factors make me think should could be a future nominee. She would be a shoe-in for nomination--I doubt that the Republicans are going to take the Senate, but the Democratic majority will be reduced. [I may be underestimating the memory retention of the American public. Just how badly DOES one party have to screw up to be rejected for awhile?] So, why show your pocket ace early?

Second. Nobody lasts more than 4 years as SoS. I can't possibly imagine the work involved. My wife has had the chance to (very briefly) interact with Sec. Clinton on a couple of recent jobs. In one case, Sec. Clinton took time to meet in the evening with a group of women entrepreneurs from Latin America. She flew to Asia the next morning.

Third. The legacy factor. First Lady. Senator. (Almost) President. Secretary of State. Supreme Court Justice. Perhaps even the first woman as Chief Justice.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | April 9, 2010 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Bondosan


Let's face it, you don't post enough to be included in the cabal

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Bondosan, the Slate link is a good one. Thanx.

Karlan will not be the nominee. She would draw a filibuster and I think she is the only one who would.
===================================
OTOH, after a Karlan filibuster, he can "get away" with Koh.
Col. Gunn would indeed be intriguing.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 9, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

I'm feeling really insulted that I wasn't included in the liberal cabal on this board. And here I thought that our daily, early-morning socialist-statist conference call would have secured me some friggin' recognition from 37, Jake, and Zouk!

Jake: I'm lovin' the new handle. It's so golden-age comic book. There you were, lovable and irascible JakeD, working in your laboratory and stopping for a quick cigarette break, when--oops!--you knocked over a bunch of chemicals, and presto: You are now the masked avenger of the extreme right: Comrade_Zero!

Back to the subject at hand: Slate's got an interesting "offbeat shortlist" of Supreme Court picks:

http://www.slate.com/id/2250251/

I'm loving Harold Koh, Pam Karlan, and someone I'd never heard of before: William Gunn (who would be a BRILLIANT pick: an African American, retired Air Force Colonel. Let the Republicans go after a veteran, especially considering that Stevens is the only veteran currently on the court).

Posted by: Bondosan | April 9, 2010 9:45 PM | Report abuse

ddawd

now you say that -

except you forget one thing

The people elect who they want to be the Senators.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Will Bart Stupak be considered for the Supreme Court ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Will Bart Stupak be considered for the Supreme Court ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

37th, if Republicans wanted to delay the health care vote, they should have let Coakley win. If the Dems had 60 votes in the Senate, likely the House and the Senate would have had a congressional conference to reconcile the two versions of the bill. Given how tenuous the coalitions were in both chambers, the negotiations would have taken a loooong time to make everyone happy. More grandstanding, more Stupaks, more Nelsons, more Liebermans. The Cornhusker kickback would probably be law today.

But instead, Brown was elected and that route was choked off. Thus, the House simply had to pass the Senate bill as well as the reconciliation sidecar. It wasn't easy, but probably easier to do a Senate bill+sidecar instead of a unified bill that would get 60 Senate votes + 216 House votes.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 9, 2010 8:22 PM | Report abuse

The San Francisco nut, Gregory Giusti, who the FBI has been arrested for threatening Nancy Pelosi, is a busy little guy.

Here's an excerpt of an email he recently sent to the Guardian.

"what do you expect from a STUPID CITY LIKE SAN FRANCISCO WHERE THE F----- PRACTICALLY RUN THE TOWN. AND WHERE MOST OF THE PEOPLE VOTED FOR THAT N----- OBAMA. AND THAT UGLY WITCH NANCY PELOSI...SO ALL I CAN SAY ABOUT YOUR ARTICLE IS IT IS A LEFT WINGED PIECE OF YELLOW JOURNALISM. THE SAME TYPE OF LEFT WINGED COMMUNISTIC PROPAGANDA THEY USE TO PUT OUT IN THE 60'S SO TAKE CARE YOU TWO PINKO COMMY AND TO YOUR LEFT WINGED COMMY PAPER YOU WRITE FOR. NO WOUNDER IT'S FREE NO ONE WOULD WANT TO BY IT."

There's lots more, too much to quote here. What strikes me is how similar this guy's writing is to a lot of posters on this and other political blogs.

If you want the whole story, here's the link:

http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2010/03/31/very-special-piece-fan-mail

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Stupak's day under the clouds (in contrast to under the sun) was stepped on by Justice Stevens.


Oh well - that became a real disaster.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 8:16 PM | Report abuse

Garak

Do you have a point - that is a fact.


It is pretty ridiculous that a party wants to push through a vote way ahead of an election.

If a party is comfortable with a policy, they should be willing to vote on that policy a week before the election, not go through a bunch of calculations of how far ahead of the election they have to be to be able to handle the political heat.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 8:14 PM | Report abuse

Ah, I see your point.
That makes sense, but I have been thinking about this for some time, I'll formulate an argument without the jokes. Briefly, in politics, a bird in the hand is worth many more than two in the bush.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 8:13 PM | Report abuse

While HRC is technically qualified and probably an easy confirm, she is an important third of the senior FP team [with Gates and Jones]. There is no reason to mess with that as BB says. I think BB meant HRC could be a "stopgap" nominee in a second BHO term where Rs controlled the Senate.

Kagan or Wood are capable of holding their own in a legal rock fight. In fact, Wood has the Big Rep for bringing the more conservative 7th C over to her views on individual cases. Wood is a 'Horn, which would please me and be a refreshing change from an all private school court. Kagan is the SG and she has already impressed with her appellate skill. Kagan is 49, which is a political advantage over Wood, who is 59.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 9, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

@37thand0street: "Obama's whole plan was to try to slip through health care in a way that the entire country would "forget" by election day - so somehow the democrats could make a comeback."

Say what? Gee, I guess all the those news reports we all saw, including those living on Planet Fox and smoking god knows what, were really about something else. All those Congressional hearings, all those TV ads, all that teabaggger ranting about repeal, all those threats by the right, they were all about what? Na'vi fashions?

The conservative disconnect from reality is truly amazing!

Posted by: Garak | April 9, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

37th, yes it is the same everywhere.
One person each, no coordination, no payment, no laser beams on cell phone towers (what is with that guy?), it is just political people who for who knows what reason either have to or want to be in front of a computer most of the time and have the wherewithal to keep up. It is simple.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 7:45 PM | Report abuse

bwjoe, its Zouk, not Jake.

Jake must be yachting, golfing, touring his stables, G5ing it over the pond, who knows, he is a bon vivant, only of that we can be sure.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 7:36 PM | Report abuse


Obama is not going to benefit by a Court fight right now - so he will look for a left-leaning but still a safe choice.


For those who enjoy a good fight, with lots of opportunities to mischaracterize the opposition, you will be disappointed.

Obama's whole plan was to try to slip through health care in a way that the entire country would "forget" by election day - so somehow the democrats could make a comeback.


That plan isn't working obviously.

However, people are not going to "forget" health care if there is another fight in Washington - it will be a piling on.

These fights really occur when the Court balance may change - you have a far-left Obama replacing a liberal on the Court so what can one expect? The balance of the Court is not going to change. There is less to fight about this time around.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Watch Intrade for new contracts on the nomination for SCOTUS.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

BB, agreed. This should be fun to watch. 37th and zook will form their little echo chamber on how whoever is picked is more liberal than Stalin and won't have the votes and what not. And of course, they will be wrong AGAIN. I luvs it.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 9, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

shrink2


It's just me here

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

JakeD/JakeD2, you may have answered this already but why are you calling yourself "Comrade Zero"?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse

BBye if you don't stop punching my arm I am going to page management. Just kidding, like they are still in the building.

But do you really think some electoral hole to plug would be a better thing for her than a career in the SCOTUS?

Roberts worries me, I think he needs a very strong, smart and politically inclined counterforce.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

http://www.amazon.com/Deluxe-Vampire-Cape-Medium-Halloween/dp/B001HMN1II

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 7:02 PM
---------------------------------
Too cool. This could be the start of something BIG.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Not HRC, though there's be no knock down and drag out fight there. What she's doing as SoS is too important. Besides, she'd be a breeze for confirmation. Keep that ace in the hole when there will be some losses in the Senate. Though Zouk's calculations make Tom Lehrer's New Math look rational.

DDAWD, could you pass me a soda?

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | April 9, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

"If it were only so, sigh."

Don't despair. Capes are readily available on the World Wide Web.

http://www.amazon.com/Deluxe-Vampire-Cape-Medium-Halloween/dp/B001HMN1II

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

12B I don't know if you know this but 37th is a small group of 'volunteers' dedicated to well, spamming the message. So they can't figure out how "we" could all be saying "the same thing" if we were not in a more or less similar arrangement and or setting. Further, this endless bleating about our getting paid is envy, a sign they wish they were.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 6:42 PM
-------------------------------------
Projection, in other words.

Well, I rather like it. I like the idea of being a secret member of a secret society of liberal bloggers. We could even have capes. If it were only so, sigh.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

12B I don't know if you know this but 37th is a small group of 'volunteers' dedicated to well, spamming the message. So they can't figure out how "we" could all be saying "the same thing" if we were not in a more or less similar arrangement and or setting. Further, this endless bleating about our getting paid is envy, a sign they wish they were.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Liberal congress - A

Liberal bloggers - B

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 6:21 PM
-----------------------------------
That clears things up. Now I know why the White House hasn't sent my paycheck.

Bwahahaha!!!!!!

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

The most politically astute pick for Obama is Sen. Russ Feingold. Everyone talks about the fight, but what if Obama's nominee loses? Or he spends everything in a confirmation fight and is distracted for two to three months from a domestic agenda that could mean votes in the fall. Feingold is a gold-plated liberal and a three term member of the Senate. The senate will not reject one of its own. And the Republican base will be almost as mad at the Republican members of the senate as the Democrats.

Pros:
--Guaranteed to be confirmed
--Jewish
--Civil Libertarian
--Ever heard of McCain-Feingold?
--Liberal
--WI's governor is a D and is retiring so he'll replace Feingold with whoever the party thinks can retain Feingold's seat.
--Legislative experience

Cons:
--White
--Male
--Not from Chicago or Harvard

After the dust-up with Israel, and the civil libertarians screaming for his head (remember libertarians support Ron Paul, civil libertarians are Democrats) and the old school liberals being generally depressed, a Feingold confirmation would energize the base most likely to stay home this fall. It is also a direct challenge to the President's calling out of the court over campaign finance. But I still think the last thing Obama needs is to spend unnecessary energy in a confirmation fight. Either he nominates a moderate or faces the possibility of losing the confirmation. Unless he nominates a member of the US Senate like Feingold.

Posted by: caribis | April 9, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Here's one:

Does Alan Grayson Even Care if He Gets Reelected?

Alan Grayson is not likely to remain in Congress very long; he represents a district that Obama won with 52 percent last year, but the district has a Cook Partisan Index of R+2.

Still even by the standards of political rookies, the idea of crashing a meeting of local Republicans and accusing them of spying on a Democratic grassroots group — in full view of phone cameras — is astonishingly unwise; he then gets offended that one of the Republicans interrupts his denunciation of the group; he then mocks one of the Republicans, a mayoral candidate, by saying he'll be lucky to get 5 percent of the vote.

Oh, I'm sure a few rah-rah Daily Kos types outside the district will write some checks, as they've always wanted a Democratic congressman who could mix Kanye West's respect for decorum with George Brett's temper control, but I can't see how this helps him with anybody in the district who wasn't already in his corner. (And perhaps even some Grayson supporters cringe at watching the man they voted for barging in uninvited and bellowing boorishly.)

Never mind whether Grayson is a good representative; he seems . . . not entirely there, no?


the drindl wing of the party.

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Liberal congress - A

Liberal bloggers - B

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, work intruded again...
where were we, oh yeah...

Maybe Bill could take over SOS, he wouldn't miss a beat, Russian reset buttons, the whole works...and they could still spend all their time apart.

Indeed, the hearings would be spectacular, must see CSPAN. Harper Valley PTA. Talk about some judicial activism...though Clarence Thomas was got pretty active all of a sudden that one time, the case of the strip searched school girl. Oh he made darn sure everyone knew how mad he was when he found out he was the only one who warmed to the idea of strip searching school girls...for security reasons, ahem, of course.

I read his opinion, every word of it.
He figured if girls were aware school officials could not make them turn their panties inside out at any time, they would have a clear "signal" to hide Midol (or Loooord knows what else!) down there. And he wrote about it too in a blistering, though solitary dissent, oh he was all worked up...he was hot, very active on that case, but I digress.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

@everyone,

Either the Members of the Liberal Infiltration Group

1. rely upon brute force, terror, threats, bribes, graft, lies and deceit

OR

2. are simply a collection of bumbling fools with nothing better to do.

BUT, can we be both?

Bwahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Kreuz Missile at 3:59pm. The conservative base is so motivated right now, the only thing a SCOTUS nomination could do is to cause it to hyperventilate and pass out. So the effect, unless Obama blows it by coming down with a bad case of the bipartisan virus, which he won't, will be to motivate the liberal base, which is in sore need of it.

Posted by: Dan4 | April 9, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.

you mean like answering a simple question about taxes with a 17 minute non answer about everything else but?

blue pill, red pill.........at the end of the day, let me be clear?

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns, as it were instinctively, to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink." - George Orwell.

There have always been demagogues like Obama. Some people see clearly what they are - some never do. Still others come to know what the Obamas of this world are, but just refuse to admit, even to themselves, that they have been so thoroughly suckered.

Posted by: leapin | April 9, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Although it is a known fact that certain species are capable of organizing, Lions to hunt for example, everyone knows that liberals are incapable of self organizing, even with a super majority and all three branches of government. Instead they squander their momentum and rely upon brute force, terror, threats, bribes, graft, lies and deceit. Witness the only Obama promise fullfilled, in the most underhanded way.

that is not organizing. When you consider the additional obvious handicap suffered by DDAWD and Broadway Joe, the utter lack of any native intelligence whatsoever, you must conclude that 37th is incorrect.

I suspect these are simply a collection of bumbling fools with nothing better to do.

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I am pretty sure that the combination of DDAWd and Broadway is too stupid to even organize a piss-up in a brewery.

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 5:34 PM
-------------------------------
Greetings, Komrade

I think this is your diplomatic way of disagreeing with 37th about members of the Infiltration Group.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

I am pretty sure that the combination of DDAWd and Broadway is too stupid to even organize a piss-up in a brewery.

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

"@DD: I can't repeat it, but Google "Renee Zellweger Kenny Chesney marriage annulment fraud" and some of the results will provide the answer.

Posted by: broadwayjoe"

haha, that's funny

Posted by: DDAWD | April 9, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

If you add to it that broadwayjoe, DDawd, and Shrink2 as well as probably 12barblues - are all coordinated as a part of one group.
----------------------------------
Bwahahahaha!!!!!!!!

At least we are not one PERSON.

Let me check to see if my payment from the White House is here....shhhhhhhhhhhhh, don't tell anyone.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | April 9, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

@DD: I can't repeat it, but Google "Renee Zellweger Kenny Chesney marriage annulment fraud" and some of the results will provide the answer.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

the same group that watches Olbie? All 12 of them? the same who still like Pelosi?

I thought they left the country when air amerika went under.

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Comrade_Zero


If you add to it that broadwayjoe, DDawd, and Shrink2 as well as probably 12barblues - are all coordinated as a part of one group.

Yes, they are all talking to themselves.

They are attempting to create the impression that many people agree with their single view.

It is possible to that they are all paid by the same group as well.

What they do also is attack other posters together - in an effort to discourage other points of view.

.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Jake, how did you choose the handle "Comrade Zero." Is this a Gilbert Arena homage?

May we just call you "Zero"?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

I see the idiots are assulting this thread now too. Oh well.

there is nothing more shallow or trite than an exchange between DDAWD and Broadway Joe.

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

BWJ, what is this Kenny Chesney thing you keep referring to? I know who he is, but I'm not following your metaphor.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 9, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

@s2: I'm really pumped for Hillary on the SCOTUS.

I hope Hillaryland puts its lobbying machine in overdrive for its fearless leader. HRC, unlike BHO, likes to fight back so the smear tactics the tea baggers tried against Sotomayor won't work against her, plus the Clintons know where all the Senate skeletons are. She will definitely call out all the "Kenny Chesneys" if they ruffle her pants suit.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

I think it should be Sarah Palin. She has all that judicial experience.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 9, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

You are correct, s2. Sorry. The Post's exposure of that connection after Souter announced his retirement removed Sears forever from any BHO short list.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

She's got my vote, she'd be great.
I used to argue with svreader about this.
She is wasted as SOS. Plus, I'd bet she'd do it, as one who used to travel for work, it gets really old, really fast. And employment for life, what's not to love about that?

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

DA Jack McCoy, maybe. But he did some ethical problems in season eight I believe.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

I think Justice Thomas has been silent on the bench for four years.

Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

s2, Hillary Rodham Clinton would be a gamechanger and she would love the chance to battle her enemies in a confirmation fight. The hearings would be her final Gloria Swanson/Sunset Boulevard moment. HRC would be the smart move. The other names mentioned as possible are yawners.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Ann Claire Williams -- U.S. 7th circuit court of appeals, former school teacher, Reagen appointee, Detroit born, Notre Dame degree, leader in African-American diplomatic exchanges. She's perfect.

Posted by: Felipe_M | April 9, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Jake, er, Comrade Zero, get a grip.
______________

37, as you well know, the Post reported awhile ago that "Judge" Sears is a protege of a Supreme Court justice who has been mute, by choice, over the last two years. There is NO chance she will be nominated.
_______________

Stevens' replacement will not change the balance of the court so his retirement will have no impact on the midterms. Maybe background noise from Faux News and Drudge but nothing more. Be serious: the average person outside BroderWorld doesn't even know who Stevens is.

IMO, the baggers' hate activity (spitting on black congressmen and waving n-word signs) and McDonnell's recent slavery denying proclamation will be a huge hole card that will ensure the Dems hold their majorities in both the House and the Senate.

Rumor: HRC for the Court. Keep it on the QT.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 9, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Time for another round of "I cannot comment on this blah blah blah." I'm thinking Obama'll try for a liberal non-judge. Somebody who can go through the circus act but doesn't have a questionable (in the literal sense, i.e. not able to question) background. Besides, it might be the last time he'll have 59 senators, so he might as well swing for the fences

Posted by: thecorinthian | April 9, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Um, aren't the activists pretty much the definition of the base?

Posted by: DDAWD | April 9, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Stevens will retire in late June or early July. Obama will name a successor after that and then the fight begins. I fully expect Obama to go full-liberal and pick a hard lefty for the post. If the fight continues until late August or even into September, Bennet and Specter are going to have to choose between further ticking off the electorate and displeasing The One.


Independent voters in the states with an open seat are going to see the party in power once again going full left with another vote, which may increase their desire for a divided government. So a lot of them will decide to take a chance on the Republican candidate for that seat. As an added bonus, imagine what Ben Nelson must be thinking.


Leans Dem - WI Feingold (D)

Leans Repub - AR Lincoln (d)
IN - Open (d)
KY -Open (R)
NV Reid (d)
NH Open (r)
Nc Burr (r)

toss up
CA Boxer (d)
CO Bennett (d)
IL Open (d)
MO Open (R)
OH Open (R)
PA Specter (D)

Looks like a pick up of 7 to me.

Posted by: Comrade_Zero | April 9, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

I predict Obama will nominate Leah Ward Sears to the Supreme Court.

The impact on the midterms will be minimal - because "the damage is already done."


Go onto the street and ask the average person on the sidewalk if the nominee is going to influence their midterm election decisions.

And I disagree that the health care extra innings did much to "energize" Obama's base - sure the activists were happy, but the activists are not necessarily the base vote.


Overall, Obama has little to gain by getting a fight going this summer - Leah Ward Sears.


.
.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 9, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

The Republican base is already motivated and out in force, and the anti-abortion groups have already had plenty of red meat thrown their way. Obama doesn't have much to lose on that hand, he only needs to look at his base at this point. At the same time, hit them on an issue where the liberal side will be more popular, Citizens United as you mentioned among a few. I also don't see the healthcare thing as being as big a deal. Support vs. opposition is one thing, but intensity and level of importance are another. If 60% oppose it, but most of them really don't care about it and three moths from now it is reintroduced with the campaign, will it be as effective an issue if the law was passed five months before and this supposedly monsterous bill was really such a minor thing in its effect that the average voter completely forgot about it (that cuts both ways, too: why did we fight so hard for so long at the expense of other things if we're not seeing real change)?

So, he needs a well qualified liberal stalwart who will excite the base and will face questioning head on in a thoughtful manner. He doesn't have eto look far: Kagan, Wardlaw, or Wood would do nicely.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | April 9, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton, that is my bet (for $5, take it or leave it).


Posted by: shrink2 | April 9, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

BO is going to pick a neocom statist. There, I went out on a limb.

Posted by: leapin | April 9, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company