Rahm says not enough votes for immigration reform. Yet he told candidates "go right" to win.

[madfloridian]

And immigration was one of the topics that he pushed hard with the DCCC's chosen candidates. He left no doubt that they were not to discuss Iraq on the campaign trail, and they were to "go right" on immigration in order to win. He told them they would risk defeat if they fought the Republicans too hard on this issue.

He's probably right, it IS one of the most effective issues the GOP has used. Of course, we could have turned the issue back on them...but that is not what was done.

Here are Rahm Emanuel's words on there not being enough votes for immigration reform.

From today's Washington Post:

Emanuel Says Immigration Reform Bill Lacks Votes to Pass

Just hours before President Obama hosted lawmakers for a discussion on immigration at the White House, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel conceded that Obama and his allies on Capitol Hill do not have the votes to pass a comprehensive reform bill.

"If the votes were there, you wouldn't need to have the meeting. You could go to a roll call," Emanuel told reporters during an hour-long breakfast.

About 20 senators and House members met with Obama at the White House this afternoon for the discussion in the State Dining Room. Aides to the president said the meeting was intended to "launch a policy conversation by having an honest discussion about the issues and identifying areas of agreement and areas where we still have work to do."

..."It's not impossible to do it this year," he said. "Could you get it in this year? Yes. I think the more important thing is to get it started this year."

Responding to a question about the political implications for Democrats of delay, Emanuel said, "It's better that it happens politically. It's also better that we continue to focus on improving the economy."

The candidates that were picked to run by the DCCC were very controlled about how to handle the issues. They were subjected to Rahm's view of the immigration issue, that the Democrats could not win unless they turned to the right.

From 2008

Two weeks ago he sent a DCCC-connected candidate training a video of himself haranguing congressional candidates to “move right” on immigration or risk defeat at the hands of Republicans. This is similar to the terrible advice he shoved down candidates’ throats last year, although then he was demanding they move to the right on Iraq, dooming the candidacies of Lois Murphy, Francine Busby, Ken Lucas, Tammy Duckworth, Diane Farrell and several others who went along with his demands. Yesterday Markos asked a blaring question at DailyKos: Is Rahm racist, or merely scared?. While walking the picket line at the WGA strike at Fox today Jane and I came up with the idea of inviting Emanuel over to FDL to ask him why he thinks adopting Tom Tancredo’s immigration ideas is a good idea and why he’s unleashed Heath Shuler to do just that.

About the same time there were comments from Daily Kos.

It's got to be one or the other, because Rahm Emanuel is behind efforts to build Democratic support for the Shuler/Tancredo "enforcement-only" bill currently winding its way through the House. Think about it -- our House leadership is strong-arming Democrats into backing a bill which is the central agenda of the biggest racist xenophobe Tom Tancredo.

More from Markos at Daily Kos

..."So we won, didn't we? Not according to Rahm and the either bigoted or scared contingent in the House that is ready to -- once again and demonstrably so -- be on the wrong side of the American public on this issue.

Americans don't want hate-based anti-immigration rhetoric and action, they want comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders and provides a path to citizenship for the millions of undocumented immigrants in this country.

Here is more about how the candidates were led to decisions about what stands to take on issues like this.

From Open Left last year

I agree with Kagro X in that it appears that Rahm's defining governing characteristic has been to approach legislation almost entirely from the perspective of how it will play in an election. That is a big negative, both because we just suffered through too much of that during the Bush administration and because it is a erroneous way of viewing the relationship between legislation and elections. People don't vote for or against you because of how you voted in legislation in the abstract. Instead, people vote for or against you because of how the legislation you voted on affected their lives. As such, the key is to pass legislation that will make most people's lives better, not legislation that will look good in the abstract the moment it is passed. The Bush administration was constantly focused on passing legislation that looked good in the abstract the moment it was passed. However, no matter how good the legislation looked once it was passed, it ended up ruining people's lives, and so those people voted against Republicans later on.

It also doesn't help that Emanuel has a very right-wing view on how to win elections. He is vehemently opposed to progressive immigration reform, arguing both that Democratic candidates should ignore immigrants because they don't vote and that women congressional candidates performed poorly in the 2006 elections because they weren't right-wing enough on immigration.

Here are Obama's words on immigrants and the problems. They are refreshing to read. I wish it could be that way. But then he picked those who surrounded him.

More than 800 donors packed into a Westin Diplomat Hotel ballroom Thursday night to pad Barack Obama’s war chest by another $500,000, according to this pool report of the evening.

In a speech to the crowd, Obama sharpened his rhetoric against some of the most vocal voices against immigrant workers and migrant worker programs.

“A certain segment has basically been feeding a kind of xenophobia. There’s a reason why hate crimes against Hispanic people doubled last year,” Obama said. “If you have people like Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh ginning things up, it’s not surprising that would happen."

Obama attacks Dobbs and Limbaugh

Rahm was right about immigration being a big issue.

He was right about how hard it would be to outdo the right wing rhetoric on that subject. He is probably right that it will take time to change it.

However this same philosophy of "go right" to win is being used in the areas of topics that are strong on the more extreme religious right.....the women's choice and rights of gays.

If you only run people who support the other party on these topics, then you most surely, most certainly, will not ever have the votes to really change things.

[Richard Steele]

1. Rahm Emanuel is a greasy, amoral little crapweasel.

HATE is a strong word...and I truly hate Rahm Emanuel.
I hope he catches some fatal disease that takes a very long time
to kill him.

That would be nothing compared to the misery and suffering
he's inflicted upon this nation with his toady-style "power brokering".

[madfloridian]

2. I would not use words that harsh, but it IS hard to see him as the face of the WH

It does bother me.

[tavalon]

23. He is quite the creep, isn't he?

I wonder what Obama sees in him.

[madfloridian]

3. "Not enough votes"...those words are my biggest gripe.

We have a good majority...if not now on these issues, when?

[madfloridian]

4. Not enough votes on war issues, women's rights, gay rights, immigrants

That's a real problem

[imdjh]

15. Being a Democrat and being pro-borderless is not the same thing. nt

[kevinbgoode]

5. If we don't have enough votes for anything meaningful,

then what was the point of giving Democrats control of Congress?

[madfloridian]

8. Good question.

One I hate to think about.

[tavalon]

21. No, no, no

We need a supermajority. I wonder what the next excuse will be.

[democracy1st]

6. this guy along with all these so called centrist Pres Obama appointed suck!

[AlphaCentauri]

7. Political ambitions?

Rahm is expecting to win elections letting hate grow like sun flowers?, you'll see how many votes he will gain.

[madfloridian]

9. They will plan to get the votes of the far right, the right, and a few moderates...

That is all they will need.

I am so tired of being told we don't have the votes.

[AlphaCentauri]

14. Rahm want to turn the Obama presidency in something that will fit republicans

like the Clinton's years, that's how republicans got in power

[DFW]

10. Now that Howard Dean is gone

Rahm can try to prove that his strategy does, too, win elections,
and then point to Howard and say "see? I told ya!"

This reminds me of nothing so much as Bush Lite trying to show
up Daddy by invading Iraq and "winning." We all know how well
that one turned out.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DFW]

12. I must have missed that one

It has been a hectic few weeks for me, and staying those two extra days
in New York, while worth the effort, has thrown my whole summer work
schedule a little out of whack.

I can't think of one thing I've heard Howard say that I found off the mark,
so I doubt I would have disagreed with you (or him) on that, either, but
it's one theme I haven't been following closely.

I usually find that when I start a thread that contains any kind of point
of view in it, unless it's the merits of chocolate, or something like that,
you will get bashed for it. The perils of a Democratic board as opposed to
the lack of them on a Republican board, I suppose. Nasty, like greed, is not
good. Both, however, are annoyingly prevalent at times.

[madfloridian]

13. Heh heh

Perhaps I should post about the merits of chocolate and post cheery pictures. A POV can be a risky thing to have at a Democratic forum.

[tavalon]

22. Please don't

POVs are good things.

[Political Heretic]

16. These guys are going to drive the party right into the ground

...even when Washington is gift wrapped for Democrats like it is now.

They are going to drive it into the ground and leave people like Obama stranded without public support and with a stalled agenda.

[McCamy Taylor]

17. You can hardly get a meaningful discussion among Dems re immigrants now.

They many self styled leaders are too chicken shit to buck the RNC and do the right thing.

Lord save us from spineless Dems.

[madfloridian]

19. I agree with that.

No matter how pragmatically one posts, it is hard to get a discussion. We let them totally take over that issue.

[madrchsod]

18. rahm is a coward.

he hides behind the idea the democrats can`t win. everyone on both sides want reform and the democrats are in power...so what`s the problem?

[scentopine]

20. Hear that hissing noise?

That's the last bit of air being let out of the change balloon.

Rahm Emanuel is calculating that if Obama does nothing he can coast through the 2010 mid terms on good will. This is arrogance and risk on a huge scale. I can promise him that at the grass roots level even if he comes begging on hands and knees, many of us will just say no. "Centrists" and the "Mushy Middles" don't pound on doors and spend cash like impassioned rank and file.

Obama picked up a lot of Bush voters who could see the McCain/Palin operation created Frankenstein's monster. As soon as a "moderate" republican surfaces who isn't a total nut job like the McCain or Palin, those mushy-middle "democrats" that Obama has been nurturing are going to bolt back to the republicans.

Then, DCCC will come begging for us for more money and support while promising change. Wild speculation? No. It is a very predictable outcome.

[tooeyeten]

24. Where's change?