CaptMurdock, who let’s face it isn’t especially representative of the posting here, was operating in a tossup environment, unlike today.
Besides I agree with him. I mean I’d like to forget about the Republican’s chances in the Senate if only to aid in my quiescence, but love of country forces me to remain observant of the hard cold facts.
What?
Posters clicking here may have differing interpretations of CaptMurdoch’s statement. Void where prohibited.
In other news, Nate thinks that the road to Democratic Senate control runs through Georgia. While there is admittedly more than one path, Georgia appears to be the tossup 51st state, as it were. I say that success in Georgia and Kentucky would be a resounding moral victory for the Democrats.
My fear is the the Great Uniter will sign some bills into laws he should veto. Remember Trianuglatin’ Bill Clinton signing Glass-Steagall out of existence? Republican Idea=Bad Idea does not translate in the Beltway.
As much as I’d hate for the Democrats to lose control of the Senate, if they somehow managed to boot Yertle at the same time I’d take it as somewhat of a moral victory.
The unfortunate fact that even adaher cannot deny.
Of course they will. But will they turn out, or return to their moribund turnout levels of the past? The African-American community is constantly complaining that they are ignored by the Democrats and even under Obama that hasn’t changed. They don’t have to vote Republican to hurt the Democrats.
I think he’s a vicious partisan, but this is one case where I’d love to be wrong. Although it’s hard to predict how these things will turn out. Elections are a zero sum game, but politics outside of elections is not. If the Republicans and Obama actually get stuff done together, that will raise the approval ratings of both parties heading into 2016.
Glass-Steagall repeal is a bad example though. Clinton didn’t sign it because he was triangulating, he signed it because it was considered the obvious thing to do at the time. It passed overwhelmingly. Welfare reform and shrinking government are better examples of Clinton triangulating.
Lately, Republican actions have been driving black turnout to some degree. As long as Republicans do things that disproportionately hurt black people – like the egregious voter ID requirements – the Democrats probably won’t have to do much to get them to turnout.
The triangulating involved negotiating positions that would get both parties to agree to legislation. In the case of repealing Glass-Stegall, it involved changes to the law involving redlining by banks that the Democrats wanted. It was back in the day when Democrats and Republicans did this thing called “negotiating” to get legislation passed.
It’s also another little drop in the bucket of evidence that on economic issues, there is VERY little daylight between the Republicans and “centrist” Democrats. They all get their money from the same Wall Street firms, after all.
I don’t know what opinion was across a range of economists, but one Nobel Laureate who has served as chief economist of the World Bank and Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers said:
[QUOTE=Joseph Stiglitz, quoted at www pbs org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/interviews/stiglitz.html]
The next issue that came very much to the fore was the issue of repealed Glass-Steagall Act. While I was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, that didn’t go through. It happened after I left. I opposed it very strongly.
[/QUOTE]
I think you may be referring to the vote instructing the conference committee to add privacy and anti-redlining provisions to the bill. The triangulation, in short.
For instance, even most centrist Dems are in favor of increasing the minimum wage, but Republicans are increasingly opposed to the very idea of a minimum wage.
That’s great for all concerned. The voters are interested in voting; they turn out in large numbers; voter ID means we have good confidence in the legitimacy of the people that cast ballots; everyone’s a winner.
I had confidence before the voter suppression laws. Now we know that fewer qualified voters will be able to participate in elections, and that means we are all losers.
Yes, in person voter fraud is about as much a policy concern as carnivorous unicorns. As opposed to fraud by mail voting which is less than miniscule, but not curbed because it favors upper income folks.
Judging from past data, the election results will lack legitimacy: nonvoters are now poorer and voters have higher incomes. Back in 1972 voters and non-voters were pretty similar. There were differences during the 1990s, but they were mild. No longer. Non-voters skew left. For the off year election 2010, those with incomes below 40,000 had a turnout of 28%-45%. Those with incomes above $50,000 had turnout in the 52-62% range. Cite.
So there’s reason to believe that the results of this election will lack legitimacy, insofar as voter suppression policies successfully distort the voting pool. This will occur even if the Senate Dems retain control: their margin should have been larger. None of this will bother those who lack a sense of shame or democratic piety. After all, they know their arguments are weak, so they have to resort to subterfuge, ref gaming and a hefty thumb on the electoral scales.
If you’re right, the Democrats will benefit from such policies, because the Democrats have successfully (so far) portrayed them as attempts at suppression, which is a great motivator to those that the apparent suppression is targeted towards.
Oh, look! You found one! If you can manage to find another couple of thousand you might have a statistically significant problem. And she’s STILL outnumbered by Republican shills committing voter fraud to prove that voter fraud exists in any significant numbers.
The second best part of Will’s column is where he talks about the “negligible economic importance” of raising the minimum wage. Which I suppose is true, unless you’re making the minimum wage.
If I still lived in Kentucky, I’d be leaning toward voting for Alison Lundergan Grimes. Not that she’s a very appealing candidate (for one thing, being such a weasel that she can’t bring herself to admit that she voted for Obama). But she has a marvelously euphonious Wizard-of-Oz name.
Al-i-son Lun-der-gan Grimes. Fol-low the yellow brick road.
