Sep 08 2010
White House Finally Awakes From Fantasyland
It has been a long time since President Obama promised in 2009 that:
… this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.
Now that the liberals in DC have been forced to descended back amongst us simple mortals (as they must every 2-4-6 years depending on their demigod rating) they are seeing reality:
White House senior adviser David Plouffe — Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign manager — said that a bevy of races were in play, from the national to local level.
“There are a lot of competitive races out there. There’s going to be at least 70 House races in play, about 15 competitive Senate races, a couple dozen tough gubernatorial races,” he said in a video to supporters of Organizing for America, the president’s political arm.
Reality can suck at times. But its better than living in a fantasy world.
Charles Cook says the Democratics in the House are cooked:
http://www.cookpolitical.com/
AJ,
And please note, the Democrats and the Obama Administration in particular, are still in Ailinskite fantasyland:
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/117557-dem-base-told-fear-tea-party
The passage of landmark bills such as healthcare and financial regulatory reform has not triggered as much grassroots enthusiasm as initially envisioned, Democratic strategists say. And while the right is engaged this cycle, the left is deflated.
.
“This is a big problem,†said Democratic targeting and turnout guru Hal Malchow.
.
So Democrats have turned to a strategy that may be their next best bet: demonization of the “insurgent†Tea Party.
.
“These are not your run-of-the-mill Republicans we’re talking about here,†said one Democratic organizer working in a state with a contested Senate race this fall. “When you actually start telling voters what these candidates are about, it scares the hell out of them.â€
.
and
.
Uniting the party, and making sure their voters don’t stay home this fall, has become the No. 1 issue for the Democratic Party.
.
“The argument that we’ve made is that the Republican Party has been taken over by the Tea Party,†Democratic National Committee (DNC) spokeswoman Hari Sevugan said. “It not only energizes Democrats, but it’s the fundamental choice that independents and moderates face in the fall, too.â€
This is straight out of the “Personalize, Demonize, Destroy” Saul Ailinsky play book.
The problem iis that the Tea Party are not elite “old bulls” whom those tactics are effective against.
They are the private sector employed middle class.
They are a “Hornet Swarm” with no elite leadership you can personalize so that you can throw shot after shot at them and still get stung.
Trent,
But what if all those moderate dems who rejected the liberal policies ARE the Tea Party – what happens then!
Democrats plan to steal this election any way they can. They have people in place to count the votes and the ability to stuff the ballot boxes. That was part of the problem in 2008 and will be again in 2010.
The dims are demonizing the tea partiers but don’t seem to realize the scope of this movement. Just think of the 500,000 people at Beck’s rally. For every person who attended there are probably 5 to ten people who did not or could not attend but support the tea party movement. The majority of the elderly, for example, did not attend but are whole heartedly in favor of the tenets of the movement. My biggest problem is why 45% of the populace still support Obama and the dims. Do they live on another planet?
This idea that it is the duty of every citizen to vote regardless of whether they know what they are voiting for is for the birds. It is their duty to be informed and if not, do not vote. They do not know the harm they are doing. Witness life long members of the dim party voting blindly for the party and not knowing what this party stands for in today’s world.
AJ,
The next election — accept for between Sept 1 and the second Tuesday in November of even years — is always the next partisan primary.
Moderates are not the primary voting majority in Democratic majority-minority or majority Liberal Gentry urban districts and states.
Congressional seniority means only people from those places get to be Democratic Party Leaders.
This wave election is, and likely the one in 2012 will, wash away Democrats from everywhere else but those kind of places.
It will leave Democratic survivors in those districts and states worrying about nothing but a challenge from the left in their majority Democratic voter ghettos.
Consider the implications of this “admission against interest for Democrats” comment by Clive Crook:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/09/obama-surrenders-on-jobs/62605/
Politically, the downside for the Democrats is obvious: failing to raise taxes on households making more than $250,000 would be seen by the Democratic base–which Obama is now trying to energize–as a victory for Republicans and another sell-out by the administration. For many of these Democratic voters, raising taxes on the rich is not mainly a way to raise revenue, it is an end in itself; and for a few I sometimes think it may be the most important goal of policy, bar none, regardless of the consequences. My guess is, if Democrats could only suspend their zeal to punish high-income households, they could put Republicans on the spot and get a second stimulus through. But they can’t. It’s the principle of the thing.
Admitting this in such a matter of fact way effectively means Democrats have lost the entrepreneurial private sector for a generation.
And surviving Democrats who want to get reelected will have to be private sector jobs destroyers to get the sort of people who belive punishing the successful is more important than having a successful growing economy to vote for them.
The reasons why have been going for some time. The best book on the subject I have found is this one:
The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America Is Tearing Us Apart By Bill Bishop, Robert G. Cushing
See:
http://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0618689354
The gist is that there is no common American culture anymore.
We all choose to live with like minded people who have like minded values at an increasing rate.
A significant portion of our culture no longer believes in the American dream of progress and prosperity and they are out to destroy our economy and ordered liberty rather than allow it’s existance to challenge their self-image and identity.
The last time America went through that was with the slaveholding class in the 1820’s to 1860’s.
The implications of that are grim.
AJ,
See:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/po_20100908_4334.php
Charles Cook says the Democratic Majority House is toast:
By the end of this week, the Cook Political Report will be rating about eight Democratic open seats as either Lean or Likely Republican, about 45 in the Toss Up column and 30 more in the Lean Democratic column, bringing the total number of vulnerable Democratic seats to about 80. To be clear, Democrats are not going to lose 80 seats. In the 26 years of the Cook Political Report, no party has ever even come close to winning every single competitive House race. But it would be reasonable to assume that each of the Democrat-held seats in the Lean or Likely Republican column will be won by the GOP and that the overwhelming majority of Toss Up seats will go Republican. In addition, in this kind of a wave year, it’s reasonable to assume that Democrats will lose some of the currently Lean Democratic seats, those races where Democrats are currently ahead but have far less than insurmountable leads.
IOW:
8 * 100% = 8
45 * 70% = 31.5
30 * 20% = 6
——————-
44.5 Democratic House seats lost
And the Democratic Majority Senate is not much better:
Cook Political Report Senate Editor Jennifer Duffy points out that in 1998, six of the seven Senate races rated Toss Up in the final ratings were won by Democrats. In 2000, seven out of nine went Democratic; in 2002, six out of nine went Republican; in 2004, the GOP won eight out of nine; in 2006, Democrats won eight out of nine; and in 2008, Democrats won seven out of nine. There is a strong tendency in Senate races for most of the closest races to break in one direction. In this year, Democrats have gotten few breaks.
IOW:
34 Safe/not up R seats plus
11 likely/leans R * 100% = 11 seats
7 toss up *70% = 4.9 seats
1 leans * .2 = .2
———————–
34 + 16 = 50 R seats
I don’t know, AJ, do broken legs count as “Breaks?”
and now there’s news of someone who’s NOT waking up from Fantasyland – Lisa Murkowski is apparently thinking of launching a write-in campaign which she could not possibly win, but which could make Joe Miller lose and give the seat to the Dems. There’s no explanation for doing this besides spite and an absolute desperation at the thought of giving up a ride on the Washington gravy train.
If anything could show the disgusting corruption and contempt for the voters that many of the longtime Washington Republicans have, this is it. People like Murkowski are every bit as damaging to this country as the most liberal dem out there, because they’re willing to tear the whole thing down just to keep their own personal payoffs going.
[…] not happening – hotair.com 09/08/2010 It would be a serious flip-flop. more… White House Finally Awakes From Fantasyland – strata-sphere.com 09/08/2010 It has been a long time since President Obama promised in 2009 […]
Speaking about Murkowski, what about Tancredo versus Maes?
Seems that there are some serious problems in CO as people drop their endorsements of Maes, one by one. Maes has refused to drop out. RGA also has stopped funding Maes.
Then we have this DE election between Castle and O’Donnell….
From what I’ve read, Maes is apparently completely broke – no money of his own to put in and he never set up a coherent fundrasing apparatus, never cultivated any donors. With Barbour’s committee pulling their funding, it doesn’t matter what his political beliefs are, he’s now got about as much chance of winning as Alvin Greene does. I’ve been the first to say that money isn’t going to buy this election, but anyone who tries to run a senate campaign without being able to run a single ad is toast and is just wasting space on the ballot.
Maes needs to drop out, and Tancredo needs to drop out, which would allow Susan Norton (who lost to Buck in the Senate Primary) to step in. She could win the whole thing pretty easily.
Otherwise what was an easy-to-get Governer’s seat in this all-important redistricting year is going to go dem, just because the GOP in Colorado tore itself to pieces.
oh, and btw, Tancredo talks a big game on immigration, but financially he’s a lib. I got absolutely no use for him at all, and I’m glad he’s out of Congress.
I can’t wait for the White house to hire that guy Gabor for the new Czar post. He’s going to be the Czar Czar, in charge of all the other Czars. Sweet Czar Czar Gabor.
I am still holding out for a 100 seat loss by the Democrats. Irealize that will take a losses by many supossedly safe seats but that is the kind of change that is needed.
Things are apparently so bad, the Dems are starting to self-medicate themselves…
Barbara Boxer aide charged with possession of pot.
“A senior aide for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) was arrested Tuesday for attempting to bring marijuana into the Hart Senate Office Building, according to U.S. Capitol Police reports.”
AJ,
I would not bet on the White House becoming more reality based.
See:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-base-politics-indispensable-murkowski-base-politics-and-more?page=2
3. Bubble Watch, 2010. Speculation is rampant that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel will depart after the midterms to run for mayor of Chi-Town. The UK Telegraph had this to say:
.
.
It is well known in Washington that arguments have developed between pragmatic Mr Emanuel, a veteran in Congress where he was known for driving through compromises, and the idealistic inner circle who followed Mr Obama to the White House.
.
His abrasive style has rubbed some people the wrong way, while there has been frustration among Mr Obama’s closest advisers that he failed to deliver a smooth ride for the president’s legislative programme that his background promised.
Obama is in a presidential bubble, every President is.
It is the mark of a good or great modern President to push outside the bubble consistently.
Both Reagan and Clinton did it.
Pres. George H.W. Bush did not.
I have heard very mixed reviews on George W. Bush in this regard.
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is a “pragmatic†exception to the “idealistic†Obama inner circle.
The queston is does Obama stay inside the bubble and promote somebody like Valerie Jarrett to the chief of staff position, or does he go outside the inner circle, to a “non-believer?â€
He should do the latter, but my bet is that he won’t.
More than likely Emanuel leaving signals his replacement in the chief of staff position with an “idealist†inner circle sycophant.
That is good if you are a Republican partisan and very bad if you are an American first.
I hope I am wrong and we see someone like Valerie Jarrett.