I hope that this depressing post on the Massachusetts senatorial election is wrong:
In 2010 Democrats will be slaughtered, absolutely slaughtered, because Obama and the senior Democratic leadership does not learn.
In 2012 Obama will become a 1 term president, and a right wing populist will get into power. That populist will turn out not to be a populist, and will do even stupider things than Obama economically (and may start a war, too).
but I’m afraid that it might well prove prophetic.
I think it’s possible that President Obama can prevent this series of unfortunate events. Forget the 10% and go after the 40%.
Encourage the Congress to pass a healthcare reform bill that consists of just community rating and guaranteed issue. That will enable Democrats to go home with something labelled “healthcare reform” under their belts, it will be hard for Republicans to argue against, and it will strike most Americans as reasonable (whatever its merits). It’s not what I’d prefer but what I’d prefer wouldn’t get many votes from anybody.
More leaders, fewer lawyers. Put the technocrats and partisan firebrands where they can be of the most use. Get Rahm Emanuel back to fundraising, put someone who’s a better spokesperson for the administration in his place.
More Volckers, fewer Geithners. More business CEO’s (plenty of them are Democrats), fewer bankers and academics.
I’m very skeptical of such predictions. It was less than a year ago that people were predicting, and hoping, the GoP would go the way of the Whigs.
Well, its the way politics works. And when one side wins a strong victory they over-reach and over-extend. Then they get hammered, making it possible for a strong victory for the other side. Now, our hope is that the Republicans will screw it up and only have a marginal victory and will not engage in over-reach.
Really, I’m surprised at these kinds of posts…it indicates people still think there is a pony in there somewhere. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is just a movie and most people take away the wrong message. The message is that power corrupts. Yes, at the end Jimmy Stewart is still young and naive and won that first round…but look at what it took. Can he keep it up, probably not.
Its like what Keynes said about bubbles, the market can remain in a bubble longer than you can remain solvent.
Dave, I wholeheartedly endorse more business CEOs in government, where they can do less damage than they currently do in the private sector…
I think Steve is right. They did overextend. Even though Obama was voted in after extensive debate about health care reform, this is not France where Liberte, egalite and fraternite are important. The Dems failed to realize that this is much more the land of “I have mine.” Health care reform that cuts costs has a chance. Health care reform that increases coverage without increasing spending has a chance.
HCR that cuts Medicare has no chance of passing in this environment. HCR that extends coverage to 30-40 million people will cost more, so it has no chance. Finally, bills that involve lots of spending without any revenue provision can only be passed by Republicans. This is the fault primarily of Republicans, but is enabled by Dems.
Dave- I predict that your proposals will, if offered be opposed by the current Republican party. I will put a case of your favorite beer up on it.
Steve
I thought Megan McArdle’s proposal for going forward seemed obtainable.
“it will be hard for Republicans to argue against”
If they were rational, which they’re not. With Brown’s election they now think they have a mandate. The mindset is perfectly captured in this Village Voice headline:
I predict they will not yield one inch in their opposition to Obama’s initiatives, that they will brook no compromise, further cementing in the public mind that they have interest in governing beyond thwarting the president. It’ll be interesting to see how this affects Brown’s prospects for reelection in 2012. I think he may be a two-year senator.
um, that should have been
“have no interest in governing”
sorry for the fatfingers.
Megan’s proposals are pretty good. Unless the Congress is willing to decide that Wyden-Bennett has suddenly become politically possible, I think that the best alternative would be for the Congress to pass a stream of very narrow, carefully crafted bills that address very specific issues.
Of course, I think that’s exactly what they want to avoid. They don’t want to be tied down to specifics but are looking for grand solutions that provide them with plausible deniability.
Sam,
The GoP is not nearly the monolithic block of opposition progressives like to make them out to be. They have elections to win and constituents to satisfy just like any politician. More centrist legislation is going to peel off moderate Republicans because the GoP has all the same problems with party loyalty that the Democrats do.
moderate Republicans
I thought that was an instinct species. I hope you’re right, but I fear you’re not.
Andy- That is certainly not what we saw with Lott running things. The Republicans look to be much better at party discipline.
Steve
GoP party discipline is arguable better, especially now that we know how bad the Democrats really are, but better discipline is not complete discipline. After all, RINO is well known term for a reason.