This Is a Man Who Doubles Down

The 2014 midterms were not a wave. If they had been a wave election Jeanne Shaheen would not have been re-elected in New Hampshire and Mark Warner would have been defeated in a surprise upset. However, it was close enough to it to make little difference.

Peggy Noonan sums up:

Republicans won not only because of a favorable map. In solid Democratic states, they won big or came close. Nor were the results due only to low midterm turnout. Nate Cohn,
in the New York Times, noted that turnout in Colorado was up over 2010, yet Republican Cory Gardner beat incumbent Sen. Mark Udall with room to spare. The sheer number of blowouts was mind-boggling. Sen. Mitch McConnell was supposed to win in Kentucky, but not by 15 points. In Arkansas the Republican challenger, Tom Cotton, beat Democratic incumbent, Sen. Mark Pryor, by 17 points. In Georgia, where the Senate race was assumed to be close, the Republican won by eight. Republican Pat Roberts, eft for dead in Kansas months ago, won by 10.

Among the governors, Republican John Kasich won re-election in swing-state Ohio won by an astounding 31 points. In South Carolina, incumbent Nikki Haley beat her Democratic challenger by 15 points. In solid-blue Illinois, the Republican challenger, Bruce Rauner, turned out the incumbent by five points; in solid-Democratic Maryland, the Republican candidate for governor won by a solid five. Scott Walker, perpetually under siege in Wisconsin, the focus of public-employee-union ferocity and targeted nationally by Democrats who needed to knock him off, also won by five.

The president’s response was astonishing. He says he’s listening. Clearly, it’s not to the voters or to those so discouraged by politics and government they didn’t even bother to show up and vote. One can only wonder who he’s listening to.

18 comments… add one
  • steve Link

    Go team, go.

    Steve

  • The voices in his head.

  • Elections have consequences, Steve. They won.

  • steve Link

    *** Saying that elections have consequences is divisive and the meanest thing you can possibly say.

    Steve

  • jan Link

    Saying that elections have consequences is divisive and the meanest thing you can possibly say.

    Steve, was that merely a sardonically intended statement, as don’t you recall that a similar comment was made by the president after his democratic victory?

  • jan Link

    I’ve been taken aback at how this election is being viewed by all sides. Taking partisan emotion out of it, though, and duly crediting those interested enough to take themselves to the polls and vote, it’s plain to see that the overriding intent was to turn the democrats out of office. It’s similar to an addict’s motivation in quitting substance abuse — being sick and tired of being sick and tired promotes one to change their habits. That’s what this mid term undoubtly showed — not a love for republicans, but a distaste and distrust for democrats, enough for them to give republicans a swing at doing something better.

    Furthermore, most grandiose predictions by the GOP were surpassed in the number of Senate and House seats either gained or retained. Then there is the little talked about fact of how many state houses are now under Republican control — 70% — with even the NY state senate going republican, and Arkansas (Clinton’s state) having 100% republican representation in their state houses (the first time in over a 100 years)!

    This kind of stark factual data seems to indicate that some kind of political shift is definitely happening! Will it translate into staying power? I think that all depends on the kind of governance derived from such a shift. Nonetheless, in the case of the current administration’s perceived competence, credibility, and ability to lead, the people’s loud and clear message was that there was a failure to deliver!

  • ... Link

    Jan, he’s mocking the Republican response in 2009.

    Anyway, we’ll see how he feels about reaching across the aisle in coming months.

  • steve Link

    jan- Elections having consequences is a fact of life. A tautology. Yet it was cast by Republicans, and some others, as being very harsh and divisive. Of course they have consequences. Obama will react , or not. Personally, I expect the GOP to campaign for 2016 (see the National Review on the Governing Trap) and I expect harry Reid to act like Mitch McConnell.

    Steve

  • Republicans saying, “Elections have consequences. We won,” is divisive, Jan. Not at all inclusive and welcoming like when Obama said it. You know how it works by now….

  • jan Link

    ice,

    Yes, I know how contradictory political messages can be. What I have difficulty with, though, is how the person saying them can possibly be comfortable with themselves. And, while I’m aware both parties suffer from their own mixtures of hypocrisy and hyperbole, dems rhetoric and actions seem far more egregious than ones that have plagued the republicans.

  • jan Link

    This exemplifies a vivid contrast between most liberal democrats and republicans. Ed Gillespie conceded the race to Warner. If he were a democrat most likely he would have demanded a recount (because of the less than 1% disadvantage he had), or he would have held on for dear life like the dem senator in AK is doing. He may have even defaulted to the common denouncement of being “robbed” of victory, like what was done in the Bush 2 presidential race. However, he chose none of these options and instead gave the following concession comments:

    “In the end, a shift of 9,000 votes could have changed the outcome of this election. And, if I believed there were any conceivable way that we can find a viable path to win through a recount, I’d fight as hard as I have for the past 10 months of this campaign for our polices and our principles,” he said.

    “But I ran because I love our country and our commonwealth, and it would be wrong to put my fellow Virginians through a recount when in my head and in my heart I know a change in the outcome is not possible.”

    A classy fellow, IMO….

  • steve Link

    Jan- Google Republican asks for recount. There are pages of Republicans asking for recounts. However, you are probably correct. Unlike a Democrat, a Republican would only ask for a recount because they love their country.

    Steve

  • jan Link

    Kind of a snarky comment Steve.

    However, my post was a measured one in saying most, not all, dealing with dems and recounts. Gillespie would have been within the legal perimeters of VA law, howeverr, to request a recount involving less than a 1% discrepancy between him and Warner. And, that’s the point I was making in saying he relinquished his challenge for the VA senate seat without a lot of drama. IMO, that showed classy acceptance for the loss — a maturity not always seen in politicians who seek powerful positions in government.

  • Cstanley Link

    I don’t recall whether or not Obama used the phrase “elections have consequences.”

    What I do recall was “I won”, and the context of it. It was an extraordinary moment of candor, exposing that the grand meeting he’d convened with the loyal opposition was pure political theater. The mask came off.

  • jan Link

    CStanley,

    The “elections have consequences” statement was used by Obama during discussions with the House — specifically talking to Eric Cantor when offering a simplistic defense of disputed WH’s policies.

    The “I won” comment, though, seem to publicly resonant more, exemplifying Obama’s inflexible dilettante kind of attitude — one demonstrating a cavalier disposition rather than showing earnest attempts of diplomacy with his Congressional right-sided opponents. This was used addressing John McCain, during what was the Blair House Obamacare bipartisan conference — conducted it seems for the purpose of providing “good optics” for what was purely a unilaterally-created piece of legislation.

  • CStanley Link

    Jan, my recollection was that the “I won” comment was directed to Eric Cantor when Obama met with Congressional members on the stimulus. A quick Google check seems to confirm that.

  • ... Link

    My favorite bit of Dem hypocrisy occurred in 2006. They ran hard for the Congress on the Mark Foley page incident for “sexting” current & former male pages. A few months later they celebrated Gerry Studds as a hero for being gay and fucking underage congressional pages. No behavior is so bad that it makes a Democrat anything less than a hero.

  • jan Link

    CStanley,

    You’re right, the “I won” comment arose, not from the Blair House HC talks, but from discussions regarding Obama’s stimulus plan:

    The statement was prompted by Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona , who challenged the president and the Democratic leaders over the balance between the package’s spending and tax cuts, bringing up the traditional Republican notion that a tax credit for people who do not earn enough to pay income taxes is not a tax cut but a government check.

    Obama noted that such workers pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, property taxes and sales taxes. The issue was widely debated during the presidential campaign, when Sen. John McCain, the Republican nominee, challenged Obama’s tax plan as “welfare.”

    With those two words — “I won” — the Democratic president let the Republicans know that debate has been put to rest Nov. 4 .

    A similar kind of undiplomatic jab, however, was also directed at McCain during the Health Care Summit in 2010.

    “Special deals for the special interests and favored few” should be removed from the health care legislation, McCain said.

    Obama said in response, “Let me just make this point, John, because we’re not campaigning anymore. The election’s over.”

    “I am reminded of that every day,” McCain said, forcing a smile.”

    Then we have the “elections have consequences” remark that was supposedly leveled at Eric Cantor in 2009, during a private meeting.

Leave a Comment