JK sure is happy about Harry Reid's reelection

[JI7]

i know he would be happy about any seats the Dems win.

but keith read a quote by JK about Reid winning and Lawrence o donnell said it was a message to some(a senator from ny) that Reid will continue to be Senate leader .

[MBS]

1. yup -- here's press statement

was this what keith read?

Politico was wrong, Huffington Post was wrong, hell, all the pundits were wrong. Harry Reid isn’t just Dracula, he isn’t just Lazarus, he’s our Leader and our whole caucus is thrilled that he’s unbreakable and unbeatable.

I agree with keith on his political deduction (and, though I've not been wild about Reid, I really abhor Schumer)

[Inuca]

2. Very cool statement

Reid winning is one of the very few bright spots in an otherwise miserable day.

[karynnj]

6. He really does seem incredibly happy on that race

The Illinois and PA close loses must have hurt though - as well as Feingold's loss. I would bet that there will be one emotion speech in the Senate commending Feingold.

It looks like we should get WA and maybe CO - the NYT map, if you click on the state lets you see the counties. You can see how they voted and what percent is outstanding. In WA, she is ahead and the bulk of the remaining votes seem to be from blue areas - notably Seattle's county. CO is harder to predict as Buck has a small lead - but again the remaining votes are in mostly Boulder and the suburbs of Denver. In Boulder from the votes counted he has a huge lead - but the led in the Denver suburbs is rather small. In both it could even vary a lot by precincts out.

I also assume Kerry is delighted that Democrats seemed to have taken everything in MA. That win was so over-whelming that the Boston Herald had to write an article saying that Scott Brown is still a super star. The argument is, of course, incredibly weak and ignores that probably the only thing Brown might have influenced in this election was the primary win of Jeff Perry, who not only lost but made the Republicans look bad defending him. http://news.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1293530&format=comments#CommentsArea

[Inuca]

3. Related tweet from Steve Clemons

"Harry Reid pulls it off. Chuck Schumer may now need some anti-depressants."

[MBS]

4. heh : )

Reid really is more of a fighter than folks (including, often, me -- many of us are guilty of confusing speech-making ability wit effectiveness. . ) give him credit for. . telling, I think, that both JK and Obama seem to have a genuinely warm relationship with him. They know who's in their corner. .

Speaking of those who aren't, there's a despicable oped by Evan Bayh in today's (wed) NYT. Talk about DINO. .

[wisteria]

18. There were reasons why Bayh was passed over for President and VP slots

and, this piece explains it clearly.

[karynnj]

20. He sounds like he is happy that there were loses - and is gloating

I can't believe he held on to his $10 after the shenanigan of deciding not to run at the last minute. (He may have cost us both a Senate and House seat - as Ellswood might have been likely to win in his district.)

[karynnj]

5. Wow Clemons is snarky

You wonder though if there is truth to it - and good for Kerry to implicitly include his support for Reid as leader. Though there are things I disagreed with Reid on - especially climate change, he really did allow Kerry more time than Schumer wanted him to. In addition, given Schumer's outrageous comment on Israel's bombing of Gaza (essentially that they deserve it because they elected Hamas) I really really do not want him as Majority Leader with the ability to be seen as representing the Senate on issues. Reid seems to have ceded speaking on foreign policy to the wonderful chair of the SFRC.

It is interesting that Schumer's actions were so transparent that he was seen trying to grab the position while Reid was fighting against millions of dollars of negative ads. If the pundits (and outsiders like us) have seen his willingness to stab other Democrats in the back, I assume his colleagues have too. Having read how Clinton's peers in the Senate publicly were positive about her, but sought to block her - I can't help but think that they would be even more likely to do so to Schumer.

[Inuca]

8. As opposed to Durbin

who was much more classy about it. ANd I am in exactly the same position about Reid, he can be maddening at times, but I think he is better, both in terms of his positions, what he truly stands for, and in terms of his leadership abilities, than most (many?) people give him credit for.

All in all though, a very disappointing night :-(. I kept hoping against hope that the pundits and polls will be proven wrong. They weren't. The governor race in IL is still indecided, Quinn ahead by less than 10,000. Selfishly, this may directly affect me, since I work at a community college here.

[wisteria]

14. I hope your position remains safe. n/t

[Inuca]

17. Thanks wisteria

It probably is, but the college may be in for some even tougher times.

[karynnj]

19. I hope that Quinn pulls through - Brady seems a disaster

In the Senate, I can't help but think that part of the problem is that Gianoulias, who might have been a strong candidate in the future was just too young and had too slight a resume. If he would have had more accomplishments in public service, the problems with his family bank might not have been enough to stop him. I have read that Lisa Madigan was Obama's choice to run, but she opted not to. I only saw her when she was involved in going after Blaggo - where she seemed very good, but don't know anything else.

That Gianoulias made it a very tight race really makes it seem - that like Massachusetts, this will be a seat we can regain next time.

As to Quinn, reading this - http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2010/11/absentee-ballots-governor-quinn-brady.html - I think Quinn will win. I have always heard that provisional ballots always tend towards Democrats - maybe because more are transient renters whose addresses change. If Cook County is thought to have 15,000 absentee votes, it is hard to imagine they break for Brady - so after those Quinn may be further ahead. It is hard to figure out where Brady gets the extra votes.

Best wishes on your personal situation.

[Inuca]

25. Agree about Alexi

he seemed OK and smart but too green. The name that even somebody like me with no problems spelling or saying Blagoevich had problems with, may not have helped either :-).

On a side note, Quinn's candidate for lieutenant governor is Sheila Simon, Paul's daughter. I met her briefly at a small and rather pathetic fund raiser a few week ago, seemed nice and unpretentious. It was practically the only thing I was able to do this cycle, too many things happening in my life to be able to do more. Or so I thought. And now I feel guilty. Silly, I know, but I do :-(

[wisteria]

13. LOL, I was happy Reid won because I didn't want Schumer leading us. n/t

[beachmom]

7. Yes, that victory made me smile.

It's so fashionable to hate Reid, and other than climate legislation, I actually think he gets a bum rap. Meanwhile, I read a tweet that nobody looked sadder than Chuck Schumer. Ha, ha, ha, ha.

I'm still feeling awful about Feingold. I didn't always agree with his tactics, but I always respected him. The Senate won't be the same without him.

[MBS]

9. Yeah, WI seems to have really lost its collective mind

What happened to its long tradition of thoughtful independents and reformists? Feingold sat squarely in that tradition. Johnson is awful (a wealthy businessman with no experience and no knowledge of the issues), and so is their new stridently anti-environmentalist, way-out-far-right Republican governor, Walker. Horrifying.

[Inuca]

11. Horriffying - good word

what the hell happened? Not only in Wisconsin... I don't really understand (maybe I do not want to...).

[TayTay]

22. Fear happened

Fear is an incredibly potent force in politics.

Roughly speaking, we have the Star Wars original trilogy here. '06 & '08 we acted out the first movie (of the classic original trilogy. The second series was sub-par.)

Act 1: We blew up their Death Star and took bows all around and so forth. Oh boy, this gonna be easy and fun and great and so forth. (And we are going to get to play with the best techie toys Government can offer.)

Act II: ah, the Republican Empire struck back. Hard. Our majority is now encased in carbonate and hung on a wall on The Orange Man's office. (Da Boehner as Jabba the Hut is not inappropriate.)

So, what's Act 3? It remains to be seen.

Seriously, the primal battle behind all else in politics is hope vs. fear. We have seen both these incredibly powerful forces at work in the last set of elections. This really is a basic political fight in extraordinarily hard times. (Democrats have, themselves, played both forces in the last few years.)

It is awesomely difficult to maintain hope as a force. In '10 we were defending "hope" against fear. This is very, very tricky stuff when hope doesn't seem to be doing any visible good. People are literally afraid for their lives right now. Losing your job, your home, your kid's future, etc is a psychic blow to our national perception of who we are as Americans. Hope has to have some foothold to be a continuing force. Right now, sadly, it doesn't.

Fear won this election. Republicans know how to wield weapons of fear. (I am in a movie frame of mind, so allow me one more from 1982 Poltergeist: "Now clear your minds. It knows what scares you. It has from the very beginning. Don't give it any help, it knows too much already.") Fear works. Appeals to fear include xenophobia, jealousy, race baiting and all those other truly ugly things that still exist in America.

Hope vs. fear. Fear won a round last night. We need a few good Jedi Knights to put us back on the road to hope. Let's see who applies for the opening in Jedi-land and work for the best in the next cycle. (Which will probably be every bit as volatile as this cycle was, btw. We have resolved nothing, so everything is still open.)

Every victory contains the seeds of defeat just as as every defeat contains the seeds of victory. Truest thing I know in politics.

[MBS]

23. spot-on once again

especially that last sentence.
JK has still got his Jedi creds, in spades; in fact, IMHO, he's even added a chest-full of stars in recent years. But he can't do it alone.

[TayTay]

36. Ewan McGregor Jedi

JK is way too tall to be Yoda.

[MH1]

70. Ha ha

Have to laugh at that image. JK as Yoda - LOL.

Not much else to laugh about this week but very glad to read everyone's thoughts here.

[beachmom]

75. Hey MH1 -- I've been thinking about you since Sestak's loss last week.

I know that must have hurt; any other cycle and he would have won.

[Inuca]

26. Great to read you Tay, and yes

you are probably right. Fear, anxiety, powerful motivators and paralizers of reason. I know it, it's just that it's difficult to accept that so many people can be motivated to act against their own self-interest, to say nothing about loftier ideals.

Thanks for the Boehner as Jabba the Hut imagery, I needed the smile :-). I had closed my eyes in disgust and trying to get to sleep last night when he gave his speech, but the TV was still on. When I heard him starting to cry I was all awake again, not knowing whether to laugh or cry. A combination of both would have beem probably best suited (but difficult to actually do).

Lastly, 100% agree with MBS, you last sentence - priceless :-)

[karynnj]

73. My youngest just used MS paint to put a crying red faced Beck on the Jabba body - she though it

suited him well (and I agree.) (She had sent it to a sister on facebook.)

[beachmom]

29. Fear and ignorance.

Since everyone thinks Obama did the bailout, when it was Bush, we're not even dealing with people who know the basic facts. Not only that, they are clueless about fiscal policy. From exit polls last night, they are for cutting the deficit, for cutting taxes, and for spending more money to create jobs. Gee, people, do they not know basic math?? Yes, people vote emotionally but as my European husband has pointed out, a lot of the crap that is accepted in American politics would be laughed at in Europe. People of all educational levels there tend to be better informed than Americans. I'm sorry but that is just true, and Fox News and all that goes with it take that ignorance and add falsehoods to it for a stew of propagandic stupidity. Then those Fox News "opinion leaders" share all that drivel on Facebook and at the water cooler. Believe me, I had to hide quite a few "friends" on Facebook because they were spewing this untrue propaganda on my news feed. And I made the decision going in that my FB space was a non-political space, so the only way to ignore this crap short of defriending was to hide a bunch of people; otherwise, I KNEW myself and a giant fight would erupt.


Edit: And by the way, let's talk about the economy. The major job losses this year were GOVERNMENT jobs, largely state and local government because those entities are dealing with a shortfall in revenue. The private sector actually did create jobs this year. But more interestingly, big corporations are sitting on a TON of cash. Their big move this year? Re-buying their stock, NOT creating jobs. It is clear to me they did this on purpose so that Republicans would come in protecting them from further regulation. Am I the only one who sees this conspiracy? Of course, the funny part is that the tea partiers are not business conservatives. They're just plain weirdos completely devoid from reality. Good luck with that, Big Business!!!!

[TayTay]

35. People responded personally,

Based on their life experience. When you lose a job or fear losing a job, you cut back on expenses, cancel any unnecessary trips, vacations, purchases etc. and prepare to last out bad times. You look at your bills and try to figure out how to make payments on everything when money is tight or non-existent.

People voted the way they would have acted. Yes, this is not what was needed on the national stage. In fact, we needed to do the opposite. How was this explained to people?
Dear Newly Unemployed Person: Spend money you don't have because it will come back to you in due time.

Ah, that is not an easy argument to make. It flies in the face of what is known experience to most people. It needs emotion behind it and a genuine sense that this fight is about people. Human beings who are afraid that they are going to lose everything and that the future will be terrible. People are hanging on to life preservers at the moment. The Repubs are telling them that treading water is a fine thing to do and if you do it long enough, you will survive. Our argument is what happens to not just endure but to overcome. It is a much, much harder argument to make and it has to be made with heart and feeling and some soul.

This doesn't make people stupid, it makes them self-interested. (Not exactly shocking behavior on the part of an electorate in the middle of a very bad recession.)

Insufferably, I have another movie quote. Who makes this argument from "It's a Wonderful Life" to the electorate right now? (Remember the scene where George Bailey has to save the Savings & Loan from a possible run on the banks assets and has to talk people out of taking their money and running away?)

You're thinking of this place all wrong. As if I had the money back in a safe. The money's not here. Your money's in Joe's house; that's right next to yours. And in the Kennedy house, and Mrs. Macklin's house, and a hundred others. Why, you're lending them the money to build, and then, they're going to pay it back to you as best they can. Now what are you going to do? Foreclose on them?

Now wait...now listen...now listen to me. I beg of you not to do this thing. If Potter gets hold of this Building and Loan, there'll never be another decent house built in this town. He's already got charge of the bank. He's got the bus line. He got the department stores. And now he's after us. Why? Well, it's very simple. Because we're cutting in on his business, that's why. And because he wants to keep you living in his slums and paying the kind of rent he decides. Joe, you had one of those Potter houses, didn't you? Well, have you forgotten? Have you forgotten what he charged you for that broken-down shack? Here, Ed. You know, you remember last year when things weren't going so well, and you couldn't make your payments? You didn't lose your house, did you? Do you think Potter would have let you keep it? Can't you understand what's happening here? Don't you see what's happening? Potter isn't selling. Potter's buying! And why? Because we're panicking and he's not. That's why. He's picking up some bargains. Now, we can get through this thing all right. We've got to stick together, though. We've got to have faith in each other.

This is, with a lot of updating, our Democratic argument. It wasn't made.

Your money, Mr & Ms. Taxpayer isn't in a vault somewhere. It's invested in your fellow citizens. Believe in them, believe that we can get through this hard time if we pull together. We have to invest in things that benefit all of us. We even have to spend a little money we don't have in order to help ourselves out.

Who made this argument?

[beachmom]

42. Are we sure it was the unemployed who voted GOP?

Now 9.6% is high, but I swear a lot of people who voted GOP are comfortable and have a secure job. Not only that, I think a lot of unemployed or underemployed did not vote, because they're just too overwhelmed by what's happening in their life, and they don't view Washington as relevant to their lives.

I thought I read a poll that the Tea Party types are made up of people who have it all, and don't want to help out those not so lucky.

I would concede the midwest had more of what you are talking about; still, the young have suffered a lot in terms of unemployment, and they voted Dem; however, too few of them showed up.

[TayTay]

43. Actually I agree with this

This is the essence of fear of change. These folks fear losing something and vote protectively. They also have a fear vote. Change threatens them. Surely we all know the neighbor who, when faced with a fire at a neighbors hourse, grabs a house and begins to spray their own house to protect it from fire. The neighbors house might burn to the ground, but their house is protected. This is an essentially selfish act, but protective.

Tea Party folks grab a hose and spray their own houses first. This vote was for security and against disorder. The voted to protect what they have and not to expand possiblities for others to do well.

Remember, at least 40% of the electorate, at least, maybe 45%, is basically Republican and very conservative. They were never "ours" to get. We can get the coalition we had in '08 back. We have to pro-active, not re-active to get this group back.

[wisteria]

45. Well, this unemployed person proudly voted for Democrats.

IMO, it was hateful Repubs who thought people were getting handouts for not working, or taking any job available, that voted against Democrats. There is this twisted idea out here since Reagan, that Democrats pay their base with government and tax payer funded handouts and it is hard working Repubs who have to pay for it all.

Oh, and I have found a good position. I start work next week. And, it was with the help of the Obama administration and Democrats that I have been able to eat and pay my bills.

[karynnj]

46. Congratulations!

[beachmom]

47. Wonderful news, Wisteria!

I actually think the economy is going to get better. I really do, and your news is one more anecdote in that direction.

[Mass]

48. Great news.

[MBS]

49. Fantastic news!! n/t

[Inuca]

50. Great, great news Wisteria

:hug:

[wisteria]

66. Thanks for the good wishes everyone! n/t

[MH1]

72. Excellent news!

Congratulations :)

[TayTay]

37. 1000% right on what the Repubs planned

They absolutely wanted things to get worse. This whole election was about putting fears in a pot and letting them simmer. Everything the Repubs did from the day after the '08 election was designed NOT to give relief to suffering Americans. This is traitorous and slimey behavior and it's what they did.

[Inuca]

55. Yes, absolutely

and this is why I am so MAD :mad:. I just hope that a change in scenery and other, more personal concerns, will take this anger away, I don't like feeling this way (who does?... well... I guess some people do, but I definitely don't)

[MBS]

63. and so puzzling, and tragic, that our fellow citizens fell for this

. .yet AGAIN.

[wisteria]

67. There actions were obvious and that is why I am more proud then I have ever been to be a Democrat.

Thank you for making what they plotted, and planned crystal clear.

[MH1]

71. I think ignorance was a big factor.

Plus depression of enthusiasm in default-Dem voters. I don't think that happened by accident, or all by the failures of Democrats.

[Mass]

30. You're right, but I am more concerned on how people answer to this fear,

by pandering to their worse instincts or by calling to their better selves.

[ProSense]

32. Exactly.

The mid-term elections are always tough, but fear, especially in the face of change, is an extremely easy sell.

Via Think Progress:

BESCHLOSS: Look at 1965. Lyndon Johnson came in, if you can believe it Rachel, two-thirds of the senate was Democrats, two-thirds of the House was Democrats. But even despite that, LBJ said, this doesn’t happen very often, I’ve got six months. He used those six months to get through the Great Society, Medicare, voting rights, very basic programs. He said after that they’re going to start voting against me and there will be a backlash. He was absolutely right. The Democrats had huge setbacks in Congress in 1966, but LBJ and the Great Society had probably more of an influence on Americans in terms of saying where the Democratic party is, for well or ilk, than probably any other president of the period.

[karynnj]

33. Wow - that is a wonderful explaination - and unbelievably scary nt

[TayTay]

39. Thanks

I could have explained it in terms of Newtonian Physics, but I was in a movie-quoting mood today.

Which do you like better?

(Newtonian laws, which really do apply to political movement as well, honest-to-god, really, I mean it, think about it honest.)

Newton's laws of motion consist of three physical laws that form the basis for classical mechanics. They describe the relationship between the forces acting on a body and its motion due to those forces. They have been expressed in several different ways over nearly three centuries, and can be summarized as follows:

First law: Every body remains in a state of rest or uniform motion (constant velocity) unless it is acted upon by an external unbalanced force. This means that in the absence of a non-zero net force, the center of mass of a body either remains at rest, or moves at a constant speed in a straight line. (The Clinton years after 1994)

Second law: A body of mass m subject to a force F undergoes an acceleration a that has the same direction as the force and a magnitude that is directly proportional to the force and inversely proportional to the mass, i.e., F = ma. Alternatively, the total force applied on a body is equal to the time derivative of linear momentum of the body. (Wave elections caused by external great factors)

Third law: The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal, opposite and collinear. This means that whenever a first body exerts a force F on a second body, the second body exerts a force −F on the first body. F and −F are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. This law is sometimes referred to as the action-reaction law, with F called the "action" and −F the "reaction". The action and the reaction are simultaneous. (Duh, what just happened between 2008 and 2010. The Empire struck back/)

Seriously, wouldn't you really rather have movie quotes?

[karynnj]

40. Though both work, the movie quotes are far more fun

[TayTay]

41. Yes, but every so often I have to use serious terminology

or I risk losing my street cred as a pundit.

Blah, blah, blah, '08 was a "gamechanger" of an election.

No wait, blah, blah, blah, '10 was a "gamechanger" of an election.

No wait, the Republicans are dead on arrival after '08. Whoops, strike that. The Republicans have near godlike ability to bounce back because they speak Common Man. (The Esperanto of political languages.) Wait, the Democrats are not really DOA, they are just in an induced coma, waiting for the body politic to heal a bit. No, wait, nobody knows anything.

No wait, if nobody knows anything, then why are their 24 hour cable talking heads to tell people what it all means? Somebody must know something and if we talk long enough and loud enough, somebody will have an idea that is worth listening too. This is the "100 monkeys locked in a room with typewriters for long enough will eventually write Shakespeares plays" theory of political commentary.

Bottom line, don't listen to the talking heads right now. They have engorged themselves on self-reverential talk and still don't know anything. The Repubs are not godlike and the Dems are not dead. (However, that coma thing does look plausible.)

[beachmom]

51. I have thought about this more, and fear at a moderate level is a GOOD thing.

Fear keeps people from buying homes they can't afford.

Fear keeps bankers from not taking so much risk that losing on any of those bets means the collapse of their institution.

Fear means not spending so much money that when a crisis occurs there is nothing left. True for both individuals and the federal government which should have worked on deficit reduction during the good times so it could spend it during bad times.

Fear means doing smart intelligence work that will lead to less terrorist attacks.

Fear means invading countries not because you want to but because you have to. The risks are so high in starting a war. FEAR those risks.

Fear means not committing human rights violations for fear that you will create MORE terrorists and humiliate your country in the process.

Fear means government making sure rules are set so that the entire capitalist system doesn't go into freefall on account of a few banks.

Fear means making sure health care is available to all so that companies can compete globally.

Fear means preventing a natural (yet man made) disaster of global warming by reducing CO2 emissions.

Fear means changing what energy we use in this country or else China, India and Europe will and then out compete us in this new burgeoning market.

Fear means getting all undocumented immigrants in the system so that they are not abused or lead to American workers dealing with unfair wage competition. It also means we know WHO is actually in our country for security purposes.

Fear means doing everything possible to get more jobs created in this country or else our standing in the world will go way down, and we will have a group of long term unemployed workers who may never recover from that trauma.

Fear means not putting off the hard choices of getting our fiscal house in order by wracking up the deficit with tax cuts for wealthy people who really don't need them.

Fear means not cutting off the unemployed from benefits or else how are they going to eat, where will they live???

Fear means making sure the states don't themselves cause a giant anti-stimulus by laying off a huge amount of state workers.


I just don't think it's hope vs. fear. It's rational fear and irrational fear. Jon Stewart was right. He was against "insanity". Unfortunately, he (and us) lost that battle this November. Frankly, we Democrats weren't fearful enough this November. I think we need to channel the fear of Republican dominance coming back into action.

[TayTay]

52. Exactly right, but how is this said?

The litany of fears is not enough. We know, for example, that climate change is a risk to the future of humanity. Nothing less than human existence is on the table with this issue. It should be feared.

So why isn't it? Why is that message not resonating more with people? There is a hard core 40% or so of people who don't believe in climate change and think it's a hoax. We will never reach those people. They have tuned this debate out and don't believe a word that is said about it, except to believe it's a fraud.

What story catches the attention of those persuadables who can be brought around to vote on this issue?

The Democrats can be correct in their positions, but it takes massive support to get people to vote against their own short term interests. It takes a convincing, demanding, gut-wrenching story line.

So, tell me a story. Tell me a narrative aimed at about 5% of the population, maybe 10% that doesn't "get" this issue? What makes this story gripping enough to command attention?

Martin Luthor King, Jr. faced a population in the 1950's that did not see the urgency of civil rights action. How did he make civil rights a "personal" issue? What drove the narrative? What story did he tell that drove enough people to feel something, feel enough to compel sympathy and action? How was it done?

That is the problem here. You are right on every one of your points. Now tell me a compelling story that illustrates this issue in such a way as it makes the reader/listener feel that their moral soul is in peril if they don't act?

Democrats have a moral voice. This is not necessarily a religious voice, but it is the voice of moral urgency. Our very national soul, our image of ourselves as a fair and generous people who want to be good global citizens and stand up for the underdog and the "little guy" is on our side.

Tell me one story about one unemployed person. How does it feel to be unemployed? How does it feel to have to face a child and tell them they can't have a Chirstmas or Birthday present this year because there is no money. How does it feel to have to beg relatives for money? How does it feel to not be able to look a wife or husband in the eye because you are ashamed of being "useless" and unable to contribute to the household? How does it feel to look at the bills, see the one for your life insurance and truly realize you are worth more dead than alive?

Then tell me how it feels to have some TeaBagger tell that person that they are a leech on society and a "welfare bum."

Tell me that story, tell it from the heart and make me feel it. Then I will feel compelled to act.

[beachmom]

53. Presidents tell a lot of stories in SOTU addresses that are promptly forgotten.

It needs to be a story/message that is vertical: in that it isn't just the story, but it gets integrated into everything Democrats do. I don't have that story but someone out there does.

I guess, let's first talk about the Republican's story and why was it effective? Government is too BIG. But really the undercurrent of that story is "Government: what have you done for me lately? Not much, AND you are making things worse." So I almost feel like we need to dissect what precisely their story was and how it felt universal (again, the unemployed are only 9.6% or actually 17% if you count it the way Europe does including discouraged workers, etc. so it worked for far more than the unemployed). It can't be a story about someone unemployed unless there is the idea that it resonates with a lot more people. That is where Democrats have problems. It focuses on the least among us -- praiseworthy of course, but not helpful in getting those suburban soccer Mom votes.

[TayTay]

54. Government is the Borg

in this view. They are a faceless entity that comes in, dictates terms, brokers no dissent and feels nothing about anyone. That is the successful Republican narrative. Government means, "Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated."

This plays into some of the big mythical sides of the American story. (America is a land of myth. We are so thick with myths and legends and beliefs that it permeates our soil. God, what other nation would even be able to utter the phrase "American exceptionalism" and not laugh at the arrogance and hubris of that ideology. Here, we have to swear allegiance to that concept.)

One of the biggest and most dug-in myths Americans believe about themselves is the belief in a sort of absolute individualism. This is the "cowboy" side of the American personality. We are a self-made people. We pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and single-handedly take charge of our own success. We fall down sometimes, but our grit and determination and self-reliance lead us to get right back up, without help, as "manly" Americans should. ("Manly" is really a gender-neutral word here, oddly enough.)

Americans have always believed they control their own destinies and if they succeed it's through their own efforts and if they fail they deserve and usually get another chance. THIS IS UNTRUE in most cases, which makes no difference to the myth. Republicans exploit this strand in the American character. America is the land of opportunity and if you can' make it here, then maybe, just maybe, it's because of sabotage. Or maybe it's because there are traitors to this ideology among us who don't really believe in hard work and pulling one's self up by one's own bootstraps.

Reliance on government is a direct challenge to one of the biggest myths of America. We are up against that.

Strangely enough, this myth has been getting more powerful lately, not less. When confronted with the stark reality that most workers are cogs in a corporate machine that does not value them, this sets up a dynamic where we have to confront the concept of powerlessness. Republicans exploit these feelings and turn them against "the other" by telling people they did not fail, they were betrayed. Americans, the corporate mythmakers say, would be able to chart their own course, if only they didn't have to deal with inferiors who want handouts or a government that wants to restrict their ability to do what they want.

Republicans understand that America has a soul. That soul is by no means filled with all sweetness and light. (Hardly.) Every good thing we can say about the American character has an opposite, ugly side. Republicans know how to exploit that. They know how to build a narrative that seeks to soothe the feelings of those who feel powerless. Yes, this makes no functional sense, but it is an effective political means of driving the national dialogue.

I don't want to make a long, wordy post longer, but you can also guess there is another side to the American story. (Short hand again: Anybody ever see Star Trek? Damn, that is so friggin American in the concept it takes. It view a future that we very much believe is our birthright, down to the multi-ethnic crew and acceptance of differences.) Briefly, yeah, these explanations of the American character are on a constant collision course. Republicans know this and exploit it. I wonder if Democrats know this.

[beachmom]

61. On rugged individualism, we have an entire industry built on it: Self Improvement

I was a major fan of self improvement books for probably two decades (God am I that old?), and then suddenly, I realized a lot of it was bunk. Well, I still like Dale Carnegie, but what started as a folksy class he taught to help people improve some things turned into this cop out dealing with systemic problems. I really enjoyed the book "Bright - Sided" by Barbara Ehrenreich where she ran into this positive thinking crap when she got breast cancer. Self improvement really took off during the Reagan '80s, yet people's lives never really improved -- except for the writers and gurus who made millions on it. It also has a religious tie in, from fundamental Christianity to New Age to Buddhism. Everyone is included in one book or another, whether liberal or conservative. The new Self Improvement always places the blame for failure on the individual while giving big corporations a free pass, as jobs are eliminated or sent overseas.

The issue is a balance -- there are systemic things only government can fix, and then there are personal things only an individual can fix. One without the other is really bad. During Dale Carnegie's ascendance, it was the Great Depression. It felt like Self Improvement and the New Deal worked together in concert. But now we don't have that. Now you're either a negative thinking loser for asking government to step in or a positive thinking successful winner who can do it all on your own. Joe the Plummer is the classic product of Self Improvement culture plus the fictional character in East Bound and Down (HBO show, but hilarious).

What we need is a story and message that marry the two ideas: like being a trapese artist unencumbered to try to do any move, yet there is a safety net below in case they fall.

The safety net was dismantled, and now Pres. Obama is repairing it. So many have fallen and have been severely injured. But that safety net MUST be strong or else all future endeavors are put at risk.

[Democrafty]

69. One thing that has always bugged me about Star Trek

is how little we know about civilian society. (I've only seen the original series and a couple of movies, so forgive my ignorance if the politics become more nuanced in later incarnations.) Are we seriously supposed to believe there are no poor people? Conflicts NOT set in space? Etc.?

And even aboard the Enterprise, power is still concentrated around a handsome white guy, there are two few women, everyone makes fun of the science and logic expert (even though he is clearly the most indispensable crew member ever) and a seemingly endless supply of red shirts to die so none of the principals can get hurt.

This is not to say I don't love Star Trek, just that there are multiple ways to present every narrative. And, hence, the unfortunate thing about having the truth on your side. Dems can't say, "Look, there's one Jim Kirk and you are not him. You will never be him, so it won't make your life better if you vote like your him." It's pragmatic, but it's hard to say, because it's the not the bright, shiny side of the narrative.

[beachmom]

74. Check out "Voyager". A woman helms that ship.

[MBS]

68. NPR commentary last (Thurs) night supported this perspective

I was in the car, kind of half listening, so don't know who was speaking, or even what program it was (too late to be All Things Considered), but, FWIW, some guy noted that opposition to health care will decrease naturally as soon as the first early benefits kick in in Jan 2011 (even the smaller provisions, not the stuff destined for enacting in 2014). One retiree will realize that the "doughnut hole" for prescriptions will be closed here; another family will realize that their children will no longer be excluded because of pre-existing conditions. . etc. ..

In other words, he predicted it will be just like you said: once people see how HCR helps them, even a little bit, support will rise.

He or someone else also said that there's no way that HCR can be repealed.(Senate wouldn't allow it and/or Obama would veto)

[Inuca]

58. Isn't this the kind of America Obama has been talking about?

And I do not mean two years ago, I mean recently. An America where "I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper". And he gives examples. And he gets effing laws passed that make it a reality, even if a perfectable one. What else can he/they/we do?

[TayTay]

60. What happened to that rhetoric?

Where was that inspiration? Where was the appeal to a shared sense of sacrifice and responsibility? (This is another side of mythic America, btw.) Where is the appeal to a sacred sense of Fairness? (This was a key component of the civil Rights movement.) Where is the appeal to a moral code that dictates that the conditions have to be right in order to foster the rise of the individual?

We have a moral voice. I still think some Dems are afraid to raise this moral imperative because they confuse it with a religious imperative. (Religion can drive morality, but morality is an impulse that can exist without religious underpinnings.) Civil rights, women's rights. workers rights, etc were all won because of decades of work that equate progress with morality. There was a sense of the destiny of fairness that is also very, very, very much a part of our national myth and story.

We can't use just anger to advance our cause. Anger is the tool of the other side. It does not fit with what we want. It's like trying to shovel snow with a rake. You might move some flakes around, but overall, it's not going to get the job done right.

Hope is our tool. We appeal to the "angels of our better nature" as Lincoln put it, when we use hope. Obama knows this. He is a Master of the form, but I think he doesn't trust it and finds it somehow a weak and lesser item in his toolbox. He would rather make theoretical arguments based on reasons and wonk-ery. Wonk-ery is great, I happen to be a wonk, after all. But we have to engage our potential voters emotionally. Our natural tool for doing this is hope, that precious other side of the American experience.

[Inuca]

57. Stewart

"we live in hard times, not in end time" quoting from memory.

[karynnj]

62. This is a fantastic list

Fear is a self protection mechanism, without with some do very risky things. I think you are right that we were not fearful enough - but I disagree on when we were not fearful enough.

I think it was when we succeeded in passing the stimulus and other things - we thought that the positive effects would be obvious and believable. Yet even tangible things - like two huge auto complies not declaring bankruptcy and throwing MI and the surrounding states into economic chaos were never seen for the successes they were. Instead, the right included it as taking over private companies in their list of how Obama is a socialist. I think on healthcare, we considered a battle won when it passed. Ignoring that the health insurance industry continued to demonize it after it passed.

I do think that Democratic strategists were not surprised by the results. If they followed either Nate Silver or the Daily Kos estimate of the number of Senate seats we were likely to retain - the estimate was (I think)51 or 52 since the beginning of September.

Reading the NYT analysis ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/us/politics/04campaign.html?_r=1&ref=politics ) of what happened - the conclusion to me is not that the Republicans are better political strategists, but that while the Democrats were addressing some of the hardest, most complex issues the country ever faced, the Republicans were absolutely focused on politics - winning the Congress - and in two years winning the Presidency. The sad thing - is that it worked - and it worked because there was no media help in getting out what was done or the obstructionism of the Republican party. It kind of put into perspective Kerry's comment that "we have lost our collective minds" that seemed genuine frustration that the Republicans were not even trying to legislate in good faith on something as important as climate change.

The depressing thing to me is wondering how we change this when - even having the Presidency with a very charming, brilliant, articulate President, we seem to not be able to break though the echo chamber's noise.

[beachmom]

64. Yeah. It's one thing if you lose because you screwed up.

Quite another when you lose for doing the right thing. I got a bit choked up watching the President yesterday when they mentioned the Congressman from Virginia Periello. That guy is a public servant, and he had Obama's back until the end. He believed in what he did and yet he lost. That and Russ Feingold. I mean when GOOD people lose that hurts.

I think the economy is going to come back this year. I suppose Republicans, who will do nothing, will try to take responsibility for it, but the fundamentals were put into place these last two years for that to happen.

[karynnj]

65. I so agree

It hurt to hear that Feingold lost - even though, I have wondered if he was not really happy these last two years.

It will really stink if the media and Republicans, set up a Faux cause and effect that renewing the Bush tax cuts is what worked - and I can see it coming. The really bad news is that I don't see anyone really addressing the fact the economy has very real structural flaws. We are not doing what is needed there or in rebuilding crumbling infrastructure. (Yet the RW praise my governor for canceling a huge tunnel project badly needed because their is really not enough capacity in the current ones.

Having traveled abroad, I have sometimes wondered sitting for a half hour at a tunnel entrance what I would think if this were a foreign country. I thought the same thing when following a navigator to take my daughter to a college friend's house through inner city Paterson. The RW comment that we Democrats don't understand America's exceptionalism (which is not even a word) are true in my case - I do see that we can fail if we don't try to create a good infrastructure and a good quality of life for everyone.

[MBS]

56. Damn Tay Tay for her metaphors

Ever since you described Boehner as Jabba the Hut, I can't get the image of Boehner-Jabba the Hut out of my mind!! :) (Frighteningly, it REALLY WORKS.)

Now that I've read that the Repub congress plans to hold hearings on the so-called
"fraud" of climate change science, my question is: what act does THIS fit into in your Star Wars scenario??

[TayTay]

59. Yeah, it does work.

Still Act 2: The Empire is still ascendant. It takes a while to get the Jedi forces assembled to re-engage the fight. (Seriously, we have to rebuild our ranks and reneergize morale first. Otherwise, there can be no fight.)

Jabba the Hut is kind of orangey, like Da Boehner. And they have similar impulses and laughs. It just fits.
Hearings on the fraud of climate-change should be a strange circus. You know, according to the folks who bleieve in fraud, the discovery of emails that show scientists disagreeing with each other is proof of fraud. Under this logic, the Bible is fraudulent because it has invited disagreement since words were first put on paper.

""

""

[Inuca]

10. Absolutely agree on Feingold

on Reid too. I need a hug :-(.

[wisteria]

15. Agree on Feingold. n/t

[wisteria]

12. I think he might have been concerned about Schumer become leader.

You know how Schumer views Kerry.

[MBS]

16. exactly.

Not to mention the fact that their political goals (in it for "number one" vs working for something larger than oneself) are oceans apart-- different universes, eve.

[karynnj]

21. I have always thought that Schumer is likely very jealous of Kerry

Schumer always seems in committees like he needs to prove that he is smarter than others and he obviously was the source of the fact that he got 1600 on the SATs. However, there are many times on the Finance, where Kerry is the one who makes more of a difference on the committees with his brilliant questioning and comments. This obviously reflects a lot of hard work by Kerry and his staff - but it appears almost effortless. It is Kerry who is more likely to laugh, smile or joke with others.

It must really annoy Schumer that Kerry was spoken of as a likely Presidential or VP candidate for decades, while Schumer has never been on anyone's short list ever. Not only that, Kerry is and always will be a statesman. Schumer has never been called that - he has been called a political hack - something Kerry is rarely called.

But, I suspect the biggest area where they are in conflict would be on foreign policy, especially on Israel.

[Mass]

24. Schumer was more classy than Reid was six years ago when he announced he would run for majority

leader before election day, saying he would challenge Daschle whatever happened. I honestly do not believe that Reid is more loyal than Schumer.

I am happy that Reid won because it is one more seat, but I would have welcome a change in leadership.

As for Feingold that I like a lot and for whom I feel awful, I just hope that he will not make the mistake of running for president in 2012. This would be terrible for democrats to have a primary challenge.

[beachmom]

27. Nobody is saying that Reid is a saint, but he got health care through.

Who else could have pulled that off? Schumer would have gone with Rahm's idea and passed some piecemeal nothing. I read a long article about Reid in the New Yorker, and the idea that he is plain and simple some corporatist sellout is really too simplistic. He grew up dirt poor, and hasn't forgotten that.

No, he was not classy regarding Daschle (and the climate legislation debacle was a low point), but I still think on balance he is better than Schumer. And that is the choice we are looking at.

[Mass]

28. I was answering to a post saying Kerry was probably relieved that Schumer did not become maj. leader

Not endorsing Schumer that I really dislike. Reid is better than Schumer, IMHO, but I hope that Kerry is not relieved because Schumer hates him, because this would be very foolish.

[beachmom]

31. Yeah, I agree that Reid is hardly trustworthy on an ongoing basis.

But Kerry seems to be playing his cards pretty well at the moment.

[karynnj]

38. Kerry's quote conveyed nothing about anyone but Reid

My guess is that he was simply just happy that Democrat made it in a race many thought he would lose - against an outrageous opponent.

[wisteria]

44. No, but Reid has worked with Sen. Kerry while Schumer seems to just want things his way.

Remember the Climate Change Bill and Schumer wanting to put that aside for his Immagration bill? I personally do not think Schumer and Kerry find much common ground to work together with. And, Schumer treated Kerry very badly after his filibuster of Alito. Reid and Kerry seem to be able to respect each other and compromise.

Reid retaining his seat and very likely retaining the majority leadership position made my night which was otherwise very sad.

[ProSense]

34. Reid's re-election was a bright spot.

People are really happy about it. One e-mail I got said: He pulled it off. Bless him. And this person isn't all that religious. LOL!

I guess people are relieved that Sharron Angle lost.

[ObamaKerryDem]

76. Love this statement! So proud of Reid..

..was so happy when he not only held onto his seat, but more or less routed Angle. It wasn't even close after all! Was so happy to see that, as the Repubs wanted that seat more than most any other..