Krugman: Lacking all conviction:

[depakid]

via atrios:

So let’s say Obama’s people have correctly deduced that there’s no chance in hell of getting anything through Congress. They have two basic options. First, they could get on the teevee every day and say, “This is my plan to help. Republicans in Congress won’t pass it.” They could hold rallies in Maine. Allies could run ads. At least people would know who is for and who is against…and just what it was that people are for or against.

Option two is back off proposals you’ve previously made and have Axelrod get on the teevee and say, “there is some argument for additional spending in the short-run to continue to generate economic activity.”

I have no idea what they’re thinking. It would be one thing if polls suggested a tolerable outcome in November, so that playing it safe could possibly make sense as a political strategy. But that’s not the way it is; and it’s hard to see what possible motivation there is for pulling punches. Going for your opponent’s capillaries when you yourself are bleeding heavily?

More: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/lacking-all-conviction/

Unfortunately, it looks as though Axelrod himself has fully bought into the Republican narrative and is so worried about being labeled a "tax and spender" that he can't mount an offensive.

[RandomThoughts]

1. Bleeding heavely????

A few group heals work good for that. Spam a couple of them, and use your timed ones right, and it is not a problem

As well as epic armor. Nice sword also.

[depakid]

2. Got any group spinal transplants to go with those heal thingys?

[RandomThoughts]

3. Courage, think of the ways people find courage.

I think it is not really about courage always, but about thinking that some choice is the best choice, without putting more value on some potential gain or loss from that choice. So courage is more of a value shift.

Faith can add courage, but it can be wrong if misplaced also. I figure you decide what you think is best and do for those reasons without fear, because making decisions based on fear is not a pleasant way to live.

[ProSense]

4. “This is my plan to help. Republicans in Congress won’t pass it.”

Imagine the Republican response: Democrats have the majority now.

In fact, that is exactly what Democrats did on jobless benefits: call out the Republicans for being obstructionists. As a result, even some critics on the left were pinning the failure to pass a bill on Democrats. In the end to get a package passed, it had to be compromised, appeasing blue dog Democrats and Republicans.

What Krugman and Atrios don't seem to realize is that in the current make up of Congress, two Republicans can grind legislation to a halt in the Senate.

It's the same reason they conveniently forget how the stimulus passed. The concept of $1.2 trillion became $900 billion after the initial debate. By the time the votes were there for it to pass, it had been reduced to $787 billion to attract Republican support.

No matter how much the critics keep pointing out their preference for bills that are big enough or go far enough, legislation still needs Republican votes to pass in the Senate.

The strategy Atrios outlines may or may not help retain control of Congress, but it certainly does nothing for attracting the two Republican votes. Look at Maine, there was a huge campaign targeting Snowe and Collins on a public opion and they still voted against the bill.

I'm not seeing how passing nothing and then blaming Republicans is a winning strategy.