Blast from the past:

Make of it what you will:

January 25, 2010

Jake Tapper and Yunji de Nies report:

Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark., fears that these midterm elections are going to go the way of the 1994 midterms, when Democrats lost control of the House after a failed health care reform effort.

But, Berry told the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, the White House does not share his concerns.

“They just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”

Asked today by ABC News’ Yunji de Nies if the president said that, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs pleaded ignorance.

“I have not talked to the president about that,” Gibbs said, employing one of his favorite dodges.

Gibbs seemed to suggest that he shared that view, whether or not President Obama said it.

“I hope it's not newsworthy to think that the president hopes and expects to be an effective campaigner in the midterm elections,” Gibbs said.

Berry told the newspaper that he “began to preach last January that we had already seen this movie and we didn’t want to see it again because we know how it comes out…I just began to have flashbacks to 1993 and ’94. ... It certainly wasn’t a good feeling.”

posted by Quiddity at 11/07/2010 05:10:00 AM

Meet the Press:

2006, after the Democrats took back both the Senate* and House and a majority of governorships, the guests were: John McCain (R) and Joe Lieberman (I).

2010, after the Republicans took back the House and a majority of governorships, the guests will be: Jim DeMint (R) and Chris Christie (R).

* because Sanders and Lieberman caucus with the Democrats.


posted by Quiddity at 11/06/2010 09:00:00 PM

Obama calls India creator, not poacher, of US jobs

I doubt that statement will convince many people.


posted by Quiddity at 11/06/2010 01:41:00 PM

Forget it:

David Brooks (yes, him) notes:

The Midwest has lost a manufacturing empire but hasn’t yet found a role. Working-class people in this region overwhelmingly backed George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 but then lost faith in the Republican Party’s ability to solve their problems. By 2008, they were willing to take a flier on Barack Obama. He carried Ohio, Indiana and Iowa.

Over the past two years, these voters have watched government radically increase spending in an attempt to put people back to work. According to the Office of Management and Budget, federal spending increased from about 21 percent of G.D.P. in 2008 to nearly 26 percent of G.D.P. this year. There was an $800 billion stimulus package, along with auto bailouts aimed directly at the Midwest.

Economists are debating the effects of all this, but voters have reached a verdict. According to exit polls on Tuesday, two-thirds of the Americans who voted said that the stimulus package was either harmful to the American economy or made no difference whatsoever.

Between June and August of 2009, the working class became disillusioned with Democratic policies. Working-class voters used to move toward the Democrats in recessions; this time, they moved to the right, shifting attitudes on everything from global warming to gun control. In Tuesday’s exit polls, 56 percent of voters said government does too much, while only 38 percent said it should do more.

On Tuesday, the Democrats got destroyed in this region. They lost five House seats in Pennsylvania and another five in Ohio. They lost governorships in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa. Republicans gained control of both state legislative houses in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Indiana and Minnesota.

You can argue about the health care legislation and the bank bailouts, but there is no doubt that government intervention saved General Motors and Chrysler from going under - along with the feeder buisnesses. You would think that the industrial Midwest (especially Michigan and Ohio) would be firmly Democratic. But that didn't happen.

That's got to be a failure of messaging (White House), a failure of explaining (by the press), or a success of opposition politics (Fox News, Limbaugh). In any event it makes it hard to justify governing in a manner that helps constituents. There is no reward, so why bother?


posted by Quiddity at 11/05/2010 02:02:00 AM

What will he get in return?

In the news:

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs reiterated on Thursday that the president will be open to extending the upper-end Bush tax cuts for one or two years as part of a broader compromise with Republicans.

If this is a compromise, then Obama should be getting something for giving the Republicans a temporary extension of upper-income Bush tax cuts. I wonder what that will be.


posted by Quiddity at 11/04/2010 07:06:00 PM

Clive Crook has it wrong:

He writes: (excerpts)

Blame the Whining Left for the Democrats' Reverse

I don't think progressive Democrats are getting the credit they deserve for the hole Obama and the party are in.

Suppose that the Democratic base had not been sulking.

Suppose it was impressed [with what] Mr Obama did ...

Mr Obama's midterm strategy could have been different. Sure of the loyalty of the base, he could have addressed himself to the anxious middle, defended his policies as centrist compromises ... and told the country ... that its concerns were his concerns.

... he would have had his base and at least a shot at bringing the centre back.

The 2010 results were due to independents shifting strongly from Obama to the Republicans. But that reality doesn't allow Crook to blame the left, say, for not voting - which they did, although at with less enthusiasm.

So he has to conjure up a bank shot by first claiming that Obama spent time placating the left (which he didn't) and therefore wasn't able to attend to independents (which weren't going to be receptive to Obama's clumsy messaging this year). And he totally ignores the Tea Party response and the effects of the listless economy.


posted by Quiddity at 11/03/2010 03:30:00 AM

2010 election result:

Obama is now on his own.

He won't get any help from the House or the Senate for the next two years. Let's see how he handles it.


posted by Quiddity at 11/03/2010 03:22:00 AM

2010 election insight:

Chris Matthews nails it:

"This country's run by the good people that run it, and the bad people, too."

posted by Quiddity at 11/03/2010 12:02:00 AM

The 2010 mid-term elections:

It's bad out there. And I don't mean in terms of Democratic losses. The badness is the misinformation and confusion and lack of clear thinking on all sides - especially on economic issues.

Oddly enough, one place where clear declarations of the problems is found over at FrumForum: The Middle Class Hits a Dead End. At Salon, Michael Lind is one of the few that sees Why center-left parties are collapsing (his reasons: free trade, open borders, multicultural, corporate-friendly).

The timing of the economic melt-down made it harder for Obama to lay the problems at Bush's doorstep, but he didn't articulate a vision particularly well, and it gave the Republicans new life. So now we can look forward to muddle and lots more anger


posted by Quiddity at 11/02/2010 05:17:00 PM