When I read this article at National Journal on Congressional Democrats and pollsters gazing nervously at the president’s deteriorating poll numbers:
But despite the Democrats’ proven mastery of campaign logistics, they face limitations if public opinion remains against them. For one, minority turnout is usually low in midterm elections, and would have to be near presidential-year levels to compensate for the party’s historically low standing with white Southern voters. Landrieu is likely to face a runoff election, against a single Republican challenger in December—a month in which turnout is usually anemic among minorities. Hagan faces the challenge of winning loyal support from Democrats as an obscure freshman senator without a high profile in Washington.
Indeed, there’s a growing sense of fatalism among Democrats. Even as strategists are advising their clients on how to best talk about health care, they badly want to change the subject and hope that the problems go away. On that point, the White House and congressional Democrats are on the same page.
“If the election were held today, Republicans would probably win back the majority,” said one longtime Democratic operative tracking internal Senate polling. “But we know for sure the election would not be held today.”
the title of this post (a Southern expression) was my immediate reaction. They’d better hope that Healthcare.gov gets fixed, the PPACA gains in popularity and doesn’t provide ongoing ammunition, the economy improves, and the president’s foreign policy overtures bear fruit. They can’t credibly run against him in 2014 and then hurry back to defend Hillary Clinton’s candidacy as a third Obama term (or an anti-Obama reaction) in 2016.
Something else in which they should take some solace: they’ll be running against Republicans who over the last few years have shown a remarkable willingness to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Politics remains local and candidates do matter.
I think Sen. Landrieu agrees with you:
“…We did not wake up one morning and declare this the law. The people of the United States declared this through us as their Representatives. If they do not like it, they can unelect us. Believe me, they will have a great chance because I am up for reelection right now. They will be able to do that. . . .
I am going to run for reelection. I am standing in this election as a supporter of the Affordable Care Act — not because it is a perfect law but because it is much better for all the people I represent than what we had before — the wealthiest people, the middle class people, and the poor people.
…Contrary to popular belief and what FOX News said, people here read the bills. For 40 years we read the bills. But we did not have to read the bills; all we had to do was look at the faces of kids dying of cancer who had no way to get cured…I don’t need to read a bill. I listen to my constituents. That is what this is about.”
Speech from Senate Floor, October 12, 2013
Yep. ObamaCare will cure cancer. Who knew?
I kind of like Landrieu and voted for her once for a statewide office. But its the kind of admiration for someone able to stand on a tack and keep balance. She’s probably more conservative than Republican Senator Mark Kirk, and she can be effectively critical of Obama and Reid. (She recently exclaimed something to the effect that the only people getting their proposals voted on in the Senate were the shrillest voices.) But she’s all in here it seems.
A bad turn for Democrats was fated when the public option got dead. Polls at the time showed very strong support when the PPACA contained the measure switching to majority disapproval without it, illustrative of how little politicians listen to their constituents nowadays. The consequences of ignoring voters is going to come around eventually.
@PD Shaw
Senator Landrieu follows a consistent pattern. For the first two years, she is a liberal. For the second two years, she is a moderate. For the last two years, she is a conservative. I suspect that this is her last term.
@Tastybits, I’ll defer to your greater insight. I have no doubt she’s very calculating, which makes the above quote quite interesting — she pretty much cut off her line of retreat.
@PD Shaw
I think that she is philosophically aligned with the PPACA supporters, but at most half of her constituents agree with her. The reason she held out for a deal was political. She could say she held out but the deal was too good to pass up, and it was a really good deal politically. The Medicaid funds would increase the LA state budget, and she allowed the state to lower taxes. At the time, I was quite impressed.
If the website rollout had gone as planned and people were able to purchase insurance, she could have weathered the backlash. She is not disagreeable or unpleasant, and that keeps a lot of the Clinton Democrats voting for her. I suspect that the lingering effects from the debacle is going to overcome this inertia.
Her best chance is to drive her base voters to the polls, and those voters are for Obamacare.