Posts Tagged ‘scott brown’

…in an attempt to stop Obamacare. In a broadcast by 73wire with Stacy McCain and Ali Akbar (Brown’s new media guy) we talked about the healthcare bill and there was an interesting exchange. I stressed how important this election was because it was necessary to stop obamacare BEFORE it was passed prompting the following:

Ali: “And if it does pass, we will repeal it!”

DaTechGuy: “No we won’t.”

It was very telling that Ali (who is a really smart young man) didn’t argue the point with me and changed the subject.

Well Scott won, but the democrats realizing that the only chance to get the bill passed now was for the house to pass the version that had already gone through the senate did so avoiding both a conference and the chance of a filibuster.

So the repeal bill is now coming up and we will find out who was right. I think Ali knows the its very hard to repeal a law once passed. He knows businesses and government have already adjusted their plans based on it. A lot of favors were done for a lot of people in that bill and those lobbyists who had those favors inserted want them preserved. Most importantly as a rule it’s easier to stop something than to do something in congress. A determined minority and frustrate the majority every time.

Yet there are real reasons to think he might be right. The left and the media are declaring that effort dead and phony but are doing their best to discourage this vote. If my original thought was right why would they bother? After all the senate is still a majority democratic institution. Very little chance on any change there is there?

The dirty little secret is until the house passes this bill the senate doesn’t have to even pretend to care, but once it IS passed than it is before the Senate. There are quite a few democratic senators who are in a tough spot. They either ran against Obamacare (WV) live in states where it is unpopular (MO) or face uphill reelection fights (Va). The retirement announcement of Kent Conrad in ND actually hurts the repeal effort because he can now vote to preserve it while the democrat who does run in his state can claim opposition.

However there is another factor involved. Every single democratic senator was the deciding vote to the passage of Obamacare this means that every vulnerable senator on the democratic side has that vote hanging around their neck. Those senators desperate to retain their seats and the power and privileges thereof will not want to run on Obamacare. A repeal vote would give them a chance to vote against it saying they’ve “reconsidered”.

Harry Reid might, in order to increase the chance of holding his senate majority allow a vote. If a democrat filibuster blocks it then vulnerable dems can clam they voted against said filibuster and if he allows it to reach the floor he can either “Fishbait Miller” the vote (let the three most vulnerable dems vote against it) or allow it to pass and let the president veto it.

This is the position that the White House least wants to be in. The president casting a very prominent vote to preserve a law that he pushed for against popular opinion. This would be a great gift to Republicans going into 2012 and represents (along with the rising price of gas and oil and high unemployment) the best chance for this president to lose re-election.

This is the importance of the house vote. It turns 2012 into a referendum on Obamacare. The closer these actions come to election day 2012 the worse the situation gets for democrats. The second best move for them would be to allow a Senate vote ASAP and get this whole thing over with early. The best option for democrats? That I’m not saying until the day after the presidential election.

Obamacare will not be repealed before the 2012 election but this vote might be the first step to insuring its repeal with a new person in the White House.

Advertisements

When heading toward re-election pols tend to take the feelings of the voters back home a lot more seriously.

In Maine for example Republicans swept statewide elections pretty solidly. It should have an interesting effect on Maine two liberal republicans and the day of their next race comes closer.

In Massachusetts the clean sweep of offices for democrats will likely not be lost on Scott Brown when election day 2012 comes around. The same turnout machine that pushed Patrick et/al will still exist, and may even be aided by national money.

But the dynamic in the Senate has changed dramatically as George Will puts it:

When Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had 40 or 41 senators in his caucus, he usually had 40 or 41 votes when he felt he urgently needed them. Beginning in January, with at least 46 senators, he will always have 41 votes when he really wants them.

There are going to be times when Scott Brown is going to want to demonstrate his “independence” from the GOP caucus. With 6 votes to give McConnell will be able to do without Brown, or Collins or Snowe and still stop anything he needs to.

The question is this. Will he gain more sympathy at home opposing the GOP or not. Or to put it another way. We know the machine will be against him no matter what he does, so will he make more points with the electorate with the electorate going left or going right?

Of course he could just do the right thing and do what he thinks is right…

Tuesday at the debate I was talking Big Red Wave with an aide to a republican candidate for statewide office, although he was feeling highly confident on his local race when I said to him that the wave would be even bigger.

I started mentioning the anecdotal evidence I’ve seen in district after district he was unimpressed.

When I brought up Christine O’Donnell and Chris Coon’s sudden Volte Face he immediately dismissed me as ignorant and my opinion unworthy.

Well if all he sees are polls like this that’s one thing, but then there is stuff like this:

Yesterday, a poll went around showing Christine O’Donnell just five points behind Commie Coons in Delaware’s Senate race. This SORT OF explains the weird amount of time the White House has been spending in a slam dunk blue state.

But, Democrats are ferociously attacking CoD as hard as they attacked Scott Brown in Massachusetts. If she is so far behind, what is the point in beating up on this woman?

This is anecdotal, but I think I know why they are doing this…just like with Hottie McAwesome there are internals showing O’Donnell ahead.

Today I talked to a friend from Team Hillary who is a big Dem fundraiser. He told me that for the last week or so the DNC has been at DEFCON 1 leaning HARD on the rainmakers because they are terrified of a CoD win in Delaware.

and this:

We have seen reliable polling that shows O’Donnell is within single digits, and Coons can’t break 50%. What is more, these polls rely on a turn-out model that is relatively conservative and, contrary to what pundits think, a much higher than normal turn-out could mean the polls are off by as much as 5-6 or more points. In the primary, most polls showed O’Donnell down by a few or tied, however she won by 6 points, a figure higher than most of the pre-vote polls and outside of their margin of error.

Why is this happening, and why might the pundits, once again, have egg on their face on election day?

Voters in Delaware are learning from reliable internet sources, despite a near blackout by the elite political press, more and more about Coons and his record.

One is right and one is wrong, but I can’t forget the Globe polls that showed Martha Coakley up 15 points:

Coakley’s lead grows to 17 points – 53 percent to 36 percent – when undecideds leaning toward a candidate are included in the tally. The results indicate that Brown has a steep hill to climb to pull off an upset in the Jan. 19 election. Indeed, the poll indicated that nearly two-thirds of Brown’s supporters believe Coakley will win.

and of course my favorite of all newspaper quotes:

The Mainstream media knows all

Somebody is right here and somebody is wrong here, by this time next week we will find out.

Update: Of course liberals always use these tactics when up 15 pts don’t they?

…but when it comes to the health care bill she is one of the few people on the left looking at the political consequences with open eyes:

The DCCC was very good at getting not-so-savvy poll analysts to try and discredit the SurveyUSA polling. (Those same pollsters, ironically, didn’t see anything weird in the Research 2000 polls they were quoting authoritatively at the time, which many now find suspect — though Jerome Armstrong spotted it). Somehow Democratic members of Congress engaged in magical thinking and believed Rahm’s BS about the popularity of the health care bill increasing if it passed.

Rather than focus on jobs creation in a country with climbing unemployment rates, Obama spent the better part of a year focused on passing a health care bill that looks like it will play no small part in the Democratic Party’s upcoming electoral woes.

Well, we warned you.

I’ll go one step farther. The Election of Scott Brown was the real breaking of the dam and the thing that made the Brown Election was the chance to stop the Healthcare bill. Forgetting everything else, the morale factor that the Election of Brown had for the tea parties and the GOP can’t be overestimated. Without the Brown victory you don’t have Miller in Alaska you don’t have the GOP establishment defeats in Utah & NC.

Brown’s election Made the Tea Party and the election climate that we have this fall, and the Healthcare Bill made Brown.

Democrats did this to themselves, Hamsher & Co tried to warn them.

I should point out that legal insurrection dissents:

I’m not buying that spin. It is true that Hamsher had some of the most devastating critiques of Obamacare. But when I wrote my Open Letter in January 2010 to Hamsher asking her to join us in defeating Obamacare, there was no response, either directly or indirectly, in words or in action. Instead, Hamsher and others were focused on improving (e.g. public option) not defeating the legislation, an ultimately futiile quest which required a level of subservience to the Democratic leadership in the hope they would come through for you. They didn’t.

Fair point.

memeorandum thread here