Skip to content

Little noted

In keeping with their fear and loathing of effective messaging, the Democrats themselves will probably never mention this, but tell your friends that the GOP only kept control of Congress because they managed to gerrymander every state they control beyond recognition. More people voted for Democrats for Congress than Republicans. It’s a point that should be hammered home, but of course, it is a fact to which neither pundit nor politician will allude. In any rationally structured country, we would have swept the table.

 

It is an unfortunate fact that Democrats have a habit of losing big in years ending in zero. The Republicans get to draw the districts, as a result of which the House of Representatives is well stocked with buffoons. The Senate is too, but not quite so abundantly. The Senate is crippled by the filibuster, and the House by gerrymandering. We are probably the least democratic “democracy” in the world. 

Obama to pull a Ryan?

Now that the election is over, and having successfully circled the wagons to protect our guy, it is incumbent upon us to maintain our positions, turn our attention inward, and form a circular firing squad. Let me be among the first to take a shot, though, as always, as I work days (even on this federal and state holiday ) there are those that have beat me to it.

The Grand Bargain is in the air. The Democrats having won, they are busily trying to figure out ways to win the approval of those that Krugman has aptly named the “deficit scolds”; give the Republicans a club with which to beat them; and quickly disappoint the base that had to work so hard to re-energize itself in order to deliver the victory.

In this morning’s Times we learn that Obama may just do now what he should have done with health care and the stimulus: rally the people for support:

As he prepares to meet with Congressional leaders at the White House on Friday, aides say, Mr. Obama will not simply hunker down there for weeks of closed-door negotiations as he did in mid-2011, when partisan brinkmanship over raising the nation’s debt limit damaged the economy and his political standing. He will travel beyond the Beltway at times to rally public support for a deficit-cutting accord that mixes tax increases on the wealthy with spending cuts.

(via NYTimes.com)

A great idea, but I see trouble ahead. Paul Ryan spent much of the campaign defending himself from well-founded charges that his numbers didn’t add up, and that the voters were entitled to know where he would cut. Of course we knew where he was going to cut, but he didn’t want to say because, after all, he wanted to win. So, will we now be treated to the spectacle of Obama touting what may be illusory tax increases on the rich while he evades or misrepresents the details of the cuts? If this is any indication of his current thinking, he’ll be selling us all out and doing his best to reinvigorate the Republican party which will be able to do what is supposedly impossible: have its cake and eat it too. Gleefully will it cut Social Security and Medicare, and then just as gleefully will it blame those unnecessary cuts on the Democrats, who will indeed be guilty of both bad policy and bad politics.

So look for Obama, should he hit the road, to get at least some supporters to cheer for their own destruction, while Ryan-like, he avoids telling us what he has in store for us. Not needing to run again, he is free to burnish his legacy by shepherding a bi-partisan shafting through Congress. Here’s hoping that the likes of Warren, Sanders and Murphy will disabuse the White House of the notion that all Democrats will go along, and lemming like, follow him off that non-existent “fiscal cliff”.

Friday Night Music

Late posting tonight, as we were out with friends celebrating a birthday and the election results.

Earlier in the week I downloaded Neil Young’s last two albums, one of which is called Americana, which consists of Young’s take on an eclectic mix of standards. The iTunes version comes with grainy black and white video versions of each song. I haven’t had a chance to view them all yet, this having been a busy week, but I enjoyed this one, and since it’s patriotic and all, and since this is a week in which Americans did themselves proud (it’s not their fault that the Republicans gerrymandered themselves into control of the House…well, it’s a little bit their fault) I thought I’d put this one up. Neil’s version of a song that sets patriotic hearts aflutter on both sides of the pond, but I think, and I think Neil thinks, our version is better.

Both sides don’t do it

The Christian Science Monitor reports that the fact that right wingers are apparently really truly surprised at Romney’s defeat, despite the fact that it was being predicted by almost every number cruncher, is evidence of a growing partisan divide. I won’t argue with the basic premise, but the piece undercuts itself by repeating yet again the common media trope: both sides do it.

Both sides of the media equation are at fault, Professor Tremayne says, noting that despite the presence of many national polls suggesting Obama was ahead, many media outlets all over the political spectrum continued to call the race extremely close.

“This is understandable because this creates a sense of drama and therefore ratings, which all for-profit media want.”

(via CSMonitor.com/2))

It’s truly hard to even discern which media outlet is on the other side of that equation, but lets get to a far more basic fact. Both sides don’t do it. We lefties may be opinionated, but we’re not deluded, nor do we demand that others act as if our delusions, if we so indulged, are true. We don’t shoot messengers. I never went to Nate Silver’s site in 2010, not because I didn’t believe him, but because I did, and it was far too depressing to face the numbers. I don’t recall a single lefty calling for his head, nor do I recall anyone at MSNBC, assuming any validity to the claim that it is the anti-Fox, insisting that the Democrats were about to triumph. We are reality based. We may be wrong sometimes, but it’s not because we insist on believing our own fantasies.

I’m not complaining, mind you. It is my fervent hope that the Republicans cling to the delusion that Romney lost because he was not “conservative” enough. There is a natural rhythm to presidential elections, such that it might normally be their “turn” to win in 2016. But if they continue to embrace the crazy, it will make it all the easier for us to elect President Warren.

Speaking of people believing their own delusions, check this out.

Election Day Musings

I’m still a bit groggy, having had only four hours of sleep last night, but as an amateur self-appointed pundit I feel it my solemn duty to get my reactions to last night’s events on record, for the edification and education of the non-pundits of the world. I freely confess that in my stupefied state, these observations will be more or less random, but they’ll still be more connected to reality that the ravings of my pundit brethren and sisthren on the teevee.

First, lets get the obvious out of the way. Romney lost because he wasn’t conservative enough. The voters who were busy endorsing gay marriage and electing progressive Senators were simply turned off by a candidate who refused to insist that a woman had to bear her rapist’s child, although, to be fair, he also refused to say she didn’t have to.

Second, Obama’s victory is no victory at all. Consider, for example, the headline in this morning’s New London Day: Divided U.S. Picks Obama. Now, if memory serves, the last time a non-divided U.S. picked a president was 1792, but this time it’s special, since you can bet your bottom dollar the Day has never had a headline like that about any other president. Particularly one of the few presidents in recent history who got more than 50% of the votes every time he ran. But the Day wants us to know that the division is special this time, and we all know why, don’t we? No election is legitimate if the majority of white men vote for the loser.

Third, Al Jazeera is every bit as full of claptrap as American networks, except it comes with a British accent and twitter girls wearing head scarfs. I know this because I have no television and I wanted to watch Mitt concede. Wishing to gloat, I first downloaded the Fox News app to my iPad, but soon trashed it, as the Rove meltdown had long since ended. I then switched to the Al Jazeera app, where I was treated to the same sort of blather I could have heard on CNN, but I did catch both the concession speech (robotic, but what could you expect) and the victory speech (masterful, but what can you expect).

Moving on, let us in Connecticut take a bow for having twice smacked down Linda McMahon, a two time Senate candidate who showed her utter disdain for voters by not even bothering to familiarize herself with the issues, never mind letting on what her positions might be. On the surface Linda’s failure is of a piece with what looks like the failure of the Citizens United crowd to buy the Senate, at least this year. But it may just be that the suckers among the rich were throwing money at Rove, et. al, while the smart money was busy buying state legislators, who are far cheaper and easier to snag, and where a small investment can realize truly monumental returns. Someone with the time and energy could do us all a big favor by looking at the role of corporate money in state politics. But, at least for the moment, we can take some comfort from the fact that Americans proved relatively impervious to the billionaire funded blandishments of Rove and his ilk.

Finally, on an even lower level, I’m happy to point out that we held the line here in our area. All our local legislators were reelected, including Ted Moukawsher, who faced an uphill battle when his district was altered to include part of Republican heavy Gales Ferry. That victory was particularly sweet, as Ted defeated one of the Paul Ryan wannabe young Republicans that pop up like mushrooms.

Also satisfying was the victory of Cathy Osten, who won her 19th district State Senate election against Chris Coutu, perhaps the most right wing member of the state House of Representatives. Coutu was going to take on Joe Courtney, but baled on that race when Edith Prague announced her retirement. I have to admit that I feared for the worst on this one, as Coutu’s signs were omnipresent, at least on the roads I travel to get to Norwich. But Norwich pulled through, and denied a majority even there to the guy who is apparently not its favorite son.

So, altogether, a very satisfying day, leaving us pretty much where we were before the voting started, but with definite signs that the electorate is becoming more tolerant and less gullible.

Listen to Sir Paul

So my wife finds these things and I uncurl from my mental fetal position and post them. The night before an election is sort of like the night before Christmas in reverse.

One more day

..and if there is any justice we will never see this man’s face again.

Tea Leaves

From Talking Points Memo:

Connecticut Republican Senate nominee Linda McMahon has been telling voters lately that it’s okay to vote for President Obama as well as her. Now she’s taking it a step further — and getting about as far away from her own party’s nominee for president as she can — and actually urging voters to cast their ballots for Obama as well as in the final days of the campaign.

McMahon campaign doorhangers that Democrats say they’ve discovered in minority neighborhoods this weekend couldn’t make it more clear: “Vote Barack Obama For President and Vote Linda McMahon For Senate,” they read. It’s a surprising suggestion from a Republican who, along with her husband, has given $150,000 to help make Romney the next president of the United States.

(via TPM2012)

Here’s the picture that was in the article:

Were I Chris Murphy, I think overall I’d take great comfort from this episode. Like Romney’s current attempt to make an issue of Obama’s revenge remark, this smacks of a campaign having nothing to lose, because it knows it is losing.

You have to hand it to Linda, though. Yesterday I would have said that Romney is the most unprincipled person to ever run for higher office in this country, at least in this century. Now, I’m not so sure.

Friday Night Music-A reprise

When this song first came out I wrote that it was an “anthem ready made for the Obama campaign, if they have the smarts to use it, and if Bruce lets them.” Well they did, and apparently he did. Nate says Obama’s climbed past 80% and I want to believe part of the reason is that he’s pushed the idea that we’re all in this together, so here’s Bruce again, this time live.

They’re only in it for the money

It recently occured to me that I’m not aware of a single race in which big money appears poised to buy or defeat a politician that would not otherwise have been elected. There’s probably an election somewhere in which the forces of evil will tip the election, but the impact so far looks to be relatively minimal.

Paul Krugman notes that this may be because there are Republican grifters between the billionaires with the money and the propaganda they want to spew, including the biggest grifter of them all, Karl Rove:

Remember how Rove and others were supposed to raise vast sums from billionaires and corporations, then totally saturate the country with GOP messaging, drowning out Obama’s message? Well, they certainly raised a lot of money, and ran a lot of ads. But in terms of actual number of ads the battle has been, if anything, an Obama advantage. And while we don’t know what will happen on Tuesday, state-level polls suggest both that Obama is a strong favorite and, much more surprising, that Democrats are overwhelmingly favored to hold the Senate in a year when the number of seats at risk was supposed to spell doom.

Some of this reflects the simple fact that money can’t help all that much when you have a lousy message. But it also looks as if the money was surprisingly badly spent. What happened?

Well, what if we’ve been misunderstanding Rove? We’ve been seeing him as a man dedicated to helping angry right-wing billionaires take over America. But maybe he’s best thought of instead as an entrepreneur in the business of selling his services to angry right-wing billionaires, who believe that he can help them take over America. It’s not the same thing.

(via NYTimes.com)

There’s really nothing new about this, as Krugman points out. Apparently Richard Viguerie made piles of money on direct mail, only a fraction of which went to the non-productive use for which it was solicited. Four years ago I wrote about another group of right wing scammers that specialized in raising money on behalf of sure losers, which losers got only the crumbs off the fundraiser’s table or ended up owing them money.

The difference between what Rove is doing now and what Viguerie and organizations like BMW Direct did then, is that the marks are orders of magnitude richer, but apparently no smarter. The Vigueries of the world went after the same sort of folks who tithe themselves so the fundamentalist preacher of their choice can live the good life, but you’d think that when you’re collecting money from billionaires they’d take care to make sure their investment is well spent. It pains me to think of Rove getting rich, but if he must get rich it’s heartwarming to know that he’s doing it by diverting money that would otherwise go toward lying about Democrats.