|
|
May 21, 2013
|
|
The GOP’s Achilles’ RegionPosted on Sep 26, 2010BOSTON—“Where are our plans for a New Deal or a Great Society?” asked Edward W. Brooke, the legendary Massachusetts Republican. It’s not a question anyone in today’s Republican Party would dare get caught even considering, but Brooke had the temerity to raise it in “The Challenge of Change,” a book published in 1966, the year he became the first African-American elected to the United States Senate since Reconstruction. The midterm election that year was very good for Republicans in general, including a Californian named Ronald Reagan. But it was an especially fine year for moderate and progressive Republicans of the Brooke stripe across the Northeast. Their prizes included governorships in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York and Pennsylvania. In 2010, Republicans run away in horror at the prospect of being called moderate, let alone progressive, and that is an obstacle in the GOP’s path to a congressional majority. It will be very hard for Republicans to take the House if they don’t break the Democrats’ power in the Northeast—and they still have to prove they can do that. “When we do retain the majority,” said Rep. Dan Maffei, a hopeful 42-year-old freshman Democrat from upstate New York, “people are going to look at the map and see that the Northeast held.” Advertisement Maffei’s situation illustrates the extent to which this election is playing out very differently in different parts of the country, a fact often lost in the sweeping commentaries. A Pew Research Center survey released last week underscored stark regional disparities that could shape the outcome. The survey found that while Democrats trail Republicans by three points among all registered voters in the South, they are ahead of the GOP by nine points in the Northeast. Because of the enthusiasm gap, Republicans do better among those who now seem most likely to vote. Yet the regional variations are even more pronounced in this group: While Republicans are ahead by one point among likely voters in the Northeast, they lead by 15 points in the South. Almost all of the divergence is driven by white voters: Among white likely voters in the Northeast, Republicans have a 10-point lead; in the South, their lead is 35 points. The emergence of the Northeast as a potential Democratic firewall has been a long time in the making. The steady realignment of the South toward the Republicans, which rendered the party increasingly conservative, called forth a counter-realignment among moderates in the North. That trend has been accelerating. Since 2006, Democrats have taken 18 Northeastern seats away from the Republicans, and the impact of this change is especially stark in New England. Among the region’s 22 House members, not one is Republican. By contrast, nine of the 25 House members elected in that 1966 election were Republicans. This year, Republicans have plausible chances for both of New Hampshire’s House seats, and for an open seat in Massachusetts. They also have realistic prospects in a number of formerly Republican seats in New York and Pennsylvania. But Maffei believes the Republicans’ evermore right-wing image, shaped in part by tea party activists, will impede the GOP’s regional comeback efforts. “I was often asked in both my races if this district had shifted left,” Maffei says of an area that runs from Syracuse to the Rochester suburbs. “I always said, no, the district hasn’t shifted, it’s still a moderate district. What’s shifted is the national Republican Party. I still have local Republicans who are moderate—and I work with them all the time.” The Republicans’ new “Pledge to America” released last week avoided specifics that might turn off voters. Yet its tea party-inspired language and its failure to grapple with the budget deficit in any detail make it a document unlikely to win back moderates the party needs. The GOP still hopes the generalized discontent that allowed Scott Brown to win a Massachusetts Senate seat and shock the nation will be enough to secure it the Northeastern victories it requires. But if expectations are overturned again—this time by a disappointing Republican showing—the region of Brown and Ed Brooke will once again play a starring role. E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com. Previous item: Return of the ‘Contract With America’ Next item: Retribution for a World Lost in Screens New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By garth, September 28, 2010 at 1:49 pm Link to this comment
What is being missed is an opportunity for the American people to retake the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Here’s another wad of spit in the American’s eye.
Tom Harkin, Senator from Iowa, is sponsoring a bill that is likely to put small dairy farmers out of business. An unreliable source quoted Harkin as saying: “Here in Ioway, I owe way too much to agribusiness to let a bill that would help them and injure the small farmer go unsupported.”
Harkin’s real role in the Senate is somewhat of a relay man. Remember the fiasco with Schiavo where Bush left his vacation at his scrub ranch in Texas to sign a special bill that gave the right-wing religious nuts the right to hold up natural causes, Schiavo’s demise. (And this after Bush played air guitar in San Diego while New Orleans drowned.)
Well, when that plan turned to shit and the shit hit the fan, people wanted to know who was behind it. That’s when Mel Martinez, a one-term Senator from Florida appeared on the Senate floor and walked over to Harkin and handed him a piece of paper.
This paper, oddly enough, outlined the whole Schiavo plan and credited it to some low level campaign worker for Mel Martinez, an attorney.
Harkin took the story to the press and no one asked what the hell was that about? They accepted the story on face value.
Here’s my account. It was all to cover up the nit wit Karl Rove in one of his biggest blunders.
Drawing Bush into the Schiavo affair was Rove’s idea. Rove was too big a media symbol and too big an asset for the right-wing for them to let go at such a time and on such an issue.
So they blamed a low level attorney (he might wind up on the US Supreme Court, though.
Martinez handed the cockamamie plan to the Democratic Senator, Harkin, the Relay Man, and he used it to get his name into a news cycle.
The whole revelation lasted about 1/2 a news cycle but left some very interesting questions that seem to have gone unasked.
Why did Bush leave his vacation to sign the special bill and yet stay in Caligfornia when New Orleans was going down?
Why would a Republican Right-Wing Cubano Senator from Florida walk over to Tom Harkin a Demcoratic Senator, and a back bencher, and hand him the secret plan?
Schiavo died as expected. Her husband mounted some sort of pay back campaign, but it seems to have gone nowhere, and we are in entering the slide downhill.
Report thisBy Samson, September 28, 2010 at 12:01 pm Link to this comment
Sometimes its fascinating what you don’t see.
On this site, I couldn’t find a single article about Obama sending his FBI to raid peaceful antiwar activists this last weekend. I guess the spin machine doesn’t want you to know that.
Obama is openly attacking the left. Which means, if you are left of Reagan, you can’t vote Democrat.
It was already obvious that if you oppose these wars you can’t vote Democrat. By now the record is clear that the Democrats are a pro-war party. Bush’s wars have become Obama’s wars. That was true all the way back to 2007 when Pelosi and Reid were shepherding Bush’s war funding bills through Congress. Now of course its even clearer when Obama has declared the Iraq war to be never ending with 50,000 troops and permanent bases for as long as he can see. Which was exactly what Bush said would happen in 2005.
Its clear when you see Obama doing a Bush-surge in Afghanistan. Its clear when you see the war of proxy troops and drone strikes that Obama has created in Pakistan.
And its absolutely crystal clear when you see the FBI kicking in the doors of peaceful anti-war activists on trumped up accusations of ‘terrorism’.
Right now, its crystal clear. You either support the Bush-Obama wars, or your a target for the Bush-Obama FBI.
And if you vote Democrat, you are voting for more wars and the destruction of constitutional rights here at home. That’s crystal clear.
Please don’t vote Democrat.
If you vote Democrat, then there’s no doubt that there is blood on your hands. There’s no way a vote for the Democrats can be anything but a vote for more blood, more wars, and more FBI raids.
Don’t vote Democrat.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, September 28, 2010 at 4:07 am Link to this comment
The so-called “Progressives” here have fooled themselves into thinking there is not any difference between the parties, despite clear-cut, blatant, in-your-face evidence that there is. (See Supreme Court Nominations over the past 35 years)
They are as committed to an unsupported, losing position that defies reality the way Christine O’Donnell is committed to “creationism” despite reality.
A religious fanatic is a religious fanatic even when the religion isn’t actually a religion. After all, the CRAZIEST of the radical “Christians” claim not to have any religion—because their faith is the Truth and all the others are false…....
Report thisBy Maani, September 27, 2010 at 8:38 pm Link to this comment
FiftyGigs:
Good post. I will repeat again the best thing I have seen on this on these boards. I forgot who said it, but it was one of the “regulars” here at TD. The last two lines say it all:
“When a radical, religioius minority with a take-no-prisoners world view takes control of a nation, you get a Taliban, a Likud, or an Islamic Counsel. This is what the new Sarah Palin, O’Donnell is promising us. Government won’t be off our backs, it will be on it 1000x worse because SHE believes you CAN legislate morality. And when she and her fellow tea-baggers get to the Senate, they won’t kow-tow to McConnell, they’ll attack, attack, attack, until the GOP leadership caves in and is fully taken over by the Teaparty. Unless we realize that ANY Democrat is always better. The house is on fire. Only a fool worries that the water to put it out is polluted and won’t use it.”
Peace.
Report thisBy FiftyGigs, September 27, 2010 at 5:38 pm Link to this comment
You folks are being suckered, you know.
Either you’d better buck up and fight twice as hard now, or shut down your browser and pretend a Republican majority won’t affect you, because the propaganda is going to get unbelievably worse over the next month.
Conservative forces—a small, wealthy group of extreme power-mongers—are massing their resources, and the Democratic Party and middle Americans like yourself are completely powerless to counter it.
Thank you, Supreme Court. Brought to you by Republicans, by the way.
Except for one thing: they can’t stop you from voting.
They can only win, if you don’t vote.
They know that. They need your passivity. They’re trying make you passive.
A powerful, sophisticated, conservative media machine is churning out a constant message about how the Democrats have failed—failed to pass REAL health care reform, failed to pass REAL finance reform, failed to pass REAL this, and REAL that.
Now, you’re echoing it. Don’t you hear yourself?
The truth is this:
Republicans wanted none of the stuff that DID pass. Despite their purely destructive tactics, Democrats passed legislation that was on balance more progressive than conservative.
Wake up.
Be suspicious that almost all the news you see everywhere echoes the same conservative message: you’re frustrated, you’re disappointed, you’re not enthused, take a stand, be an individual, stay home, don’t vote, let Republicans win.
Are you really going to allow a political party that stands for the rights of rapists to come to power?
A political party with representatives who believe the government should force you, your wife, your daughter, or your mother to carry a rapist’s seed to term?
You’re complaining about no single-payer component in the health care reform package passed by Democrats, but you’ve got NO problem paying for and propagating the seed of rapists when mandated by Republicans?
Have you lost your mind?
You need to stop pouting, get off your rear, and go vote for a Democrat. Any Democrat. Yes, absolutely. Just look for “D” and check the box.
Why?
Because that’s where the progressive movement is taking shape. It’s almost complete, in fact. You don’t like Obama? Fine. Screw him. We don’t need him.
IT’S THE CONGRESS, STUPID.
In one month, you could wake up in the morning greeted by a stunned media faced with a political landscape in which Republicans are irrelevant and conservatives are weakened to the point of impotence.
Remember that stuff about Republicans being a regional party now? How about if we make them a route number on a Deep South dead-end in a few weeks?
Media would scramble to find progressives to pontificate about “what happens now”. You all could get gigs again! Representatives in Washington would listen VERY carefully to every one of your wishes. And, best of all, the aristocrats would be scratching their heads wondering what the hell they’re going to do since money… won’t… buy… votes.
That’s the truth. You know it in your soul.
You vote Democrat because the propaganda tells you not to. Don’t start listening to conservatives now. Fight the monied interests. Punish the Republican hypocrites.
V-O-T-E
Report thisBy Tobysgirl, September 27, 2010 at 12:38 pm Link to this comment
RayLan: “But Obama appeared to be almost the diametric opposite of what he actually practiced. All appeasement and compromise - changes that made very little difference.”
If you had thought about what would make a man with brown skin successful in America, let alone successful at an institution such as Harvard, you would have realized that appeasement and compromise were the stuff from which he is made.
I never heard Obama during the campaign actually speak of anything meaningful, and how could he? His advisors were, in short, the dregs, which is why I could not bring myself to vote for him. And he was perfectly honest about ramping up the war Afghanistan.
Report thisBy Peacedragon, September 27, 2010 at 9:28 am Link to this comment
I predict that in most of the states that the Tea Party won in the primaries the
Report thisDemocrats will win. I have no expertise. I just can’t bring myself to believe
there is that much rampant insanity.
By RayLan, September 27, 2010 at 9:25 am Link to this comment
At least Bush was as he appeared to be - a inept moron. That much was transparent. But Obama appeared to be almost the diametric opposite of what he actually practiced. All appeasement and compromise - changes that made very little difference. In some ways that is much worse. And I voted for his other face.
Report thisBy the worm, September 27, 2010 at 5:29 am Link to this comment
Here’s an example of why ‘independents’ are going to ‘punish’ Democrats even
in the East.
Sixteen short months ago (but it seems like an eternity), in June 2009, a New
York Times/CBS poll found 72% of Americans ‘supported a government-
administered insurance plan—something like Medicare for those under 65—
that would compete for customers with private insurers.’
Here’s what the Obama administration has done; Obama has done since then:
1. Rejected the only option that would have simultaneously extended coverage
and cut costs (single payer) -
2. Gutted real financial reform (no Glass-Steagle, no ‘too big to fall’) -
3. Supported a stingy stimulus (one-third tax breaks) -
4. Doubled-down & accelerated the Bush bailouts -
5. Escalated a fruitless war in Afghanistan -
6. Not helped people in bankruptcy & needing mortgage remediation -
7. Nnt passed a jobs bill & had trouble extending unemployment compensation
-
8. Ignored previous Republican profligacy, crimes, misdemeanors -
9. Used “Heck of a Job, Timmy” to promote low taxes for the wealthy on capital
gains, dividends and ‘carried interest’ –
11. Sand bagged a budget balancing commission with a Max Baucus clone sent
in to gut Social Security
No matter what the Democrats say, they’re stuck with a Republican President.
Meaningful reform is not going to happen, as long as we have Obama and the
Blue Dogs have the 1/3 in the Senate (and the Senate continues with its
medieval ‘traditions’).
All Democrats are saddled with a ‘non-Reform’ agenda under this
administration.
As the non-reform of health care demonstrates, the Democrats do not respond
Report thisto what the majority wants (the majority of Americans, not just ‘Liberals’),
because they have a Republican President.
By Nate Superior, September 27, 2010 at 3:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
What seems to be lost on the MSM is Senator Scott Brown has not toed the Tea
Report thisParty line on all his votes - providing a decisive vote on supporting the financial
overhaul legislation for example - and if the TP is looking to make inroads in the
NE, they will fail miserably. I’m sure Brown cares about his constituents’ views
more than what Limbaugh, Hannity or Levin think. About the only place where
absolute ideological purity seems to matter is in the deep South, with the KKK,
with the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and maybe with colleagues of the Unabomber.