The Politics Thread

[DRW50]

With our media and the Koch power, I have a feeling the Republicans will be made into martyrs and heroes if they do this, with Democrats getting all the blame.

[juppiter]

If the Democrats get the blame it is their own damn fault, not the media's. They set themselves up for this time and time again and never play the same game when they have the majority.

[Max]

This is hardly a surprise, but it's Elizabeth Warren--and not Hillary Clinton--whom the far left really wants as its 2016 nominee. (Warren says that she won't run in 2016, but that means nothing, as Obama said the same thing regarding 2008.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/us/politics/warren-is-now-the-hot-ticket-on-the-far-left.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=todayspaper

I'd argue that Senator Warren (along with Al Sharpton) is already the de facto leader of the Democratic party. It was beyond humiliating for President Obama to have his choice of Larry Summers (for Fed Chairman) be rejected by Senate Democrats (because Warren and company felt he wasn't a "true progressive"); now, Obama will be forced to name Warren's choice of Janet Yellen as Fed Chair.

I've always had a very hard time buying the love amongst liberals for Hillary; I think a lot of it is just for show. To convince oneself of this, all one has to do is remember how viciously she was attacked by progressives in 2008. I think the major reason for the faux enthusiasm is because she is the "next in line" and is seen as the "most electable." (This is similar to how the GOP runs its primaries.)

If Warren runs against Hillary, I think that Warren will do better than expected. (She probably won't win, because it took Obama-like hoopla to defeat Hillary, and Warren doesn't have that. I predict that Warren will be the nominee in a post-2016 election, and then get decimated by the GOP nominee.) Although Hillary looks to be in a solid position to win the 2016 election, her problems will grow so large once she gets to the Oval Office. Think about it: if Obama is struggling to hold on to his own coalition (because he is not progressive enough), how will Hillary possibly hold on to Obama's coalition? She could very well receive a primary challenge from Warren in 2020, which would split Democrats and lead to an easy Republican victory.

Edited September 30, 2013 by Max

[quartermainefan]

They won't get the blame except from tea partiers who would blame them anyway. This whole thing might be a good thing because it is bringing to light the split in the republican party and we are seeing other republicans actually speaking publicly about these tea party maniacs and their naive theories on how to govern. The only one who will kill the republican party is the republican party, and all anyone else has to do it sit back and let conservatives go about their insane, merry way. It might take 10 years, perhaps 20, but eventually the zealots are going to push everyone out of the party until there is no party anymore.

Max, I agree that liberals do not love Hillary Clinton. The Clintons are not true believers. They are liberal, they do fight on the side of liberals, but they do so because it coincidentally aligns with what is good for them. That said, I would vote Bill in for life because he is just that smart and good, and voting for Hillary means backdooring Bill back into power so she has my vote. Plus, she is smart and clever, and both Clintons can out hustle the republicans.

[DRW50]

Media darling Marco is shoring up his far right flank by doing a twofer - fighting hard to make sure a black AND gay judge is not appointed. Remember this when the press gushes over how moderate he is because he loves Tupac.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/26/marco-rubio-gay-black-judge_n_3996156.html

The Fix, as shallow as ever, is so unconcerned with the shutdown that they are having a playlist.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/30/the-fixs-government-shutdown-playlist/

That's the biggest problem with this. So many are blase. It means that no one cares about change. The only people who care about change are the tea party lunatics, which is one of the reasons they get what they want.

The woman who was sentenced to 20 years for firing warning shots is getting a new trial.

http://gma.yahoo.com/court-overturns-20-sentence-woman-fired-warning-shots-221358241--abc-news-topstories.html

[DRW50]

Beltway media in action. A treatise on how laws or rulings will never be accepted by the public if they aren't passed by a wide margin...and then at the end they sneak in one that was passed by a narrow margin and was popular.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/government-shutdown-barack-obama-obamacare-aca-97687.html?hp=t1_3

[DRW50]

More of the usual Post hackery. A glib, haha look at the shutdown, just to reinforce the Fox News talking point that this is no big deal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/10/02/21-surprising-effects-of-the-government-shutdown-you-havent-heard-about/

[Roman]

Well, these Republicans have really screwed this up bad. Now they look like those people who jumped into the water off the Titanic when they didn't know what to do next. They absolutely refuse to just say "look, we screwed they up BAD. let's just pass a CR and try not to do this crap again." I just don't see them doing that because many of their supporters actually believe that what they have done is right and just because of what I call their racial hatred for the man in the OO.

[I Am A Swede]

This current situation doesn't exactly paint a very flattering picture of the U.S. or U.S. politics.

How is the public reacting to this shutdown? Is public opinion as divided as the government?

[DRW50]

The country is too polarized to fully blame one side or the other, but more is going to the GOP than the Democrats right now. The media is doing their best to change that, with breathless coverage of WWII vets not being able to get into a memorial, and now shock and horror over the WSJ (far right organ) claiming a White House person said they were "winning" the shutdown war.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/10/white-house-pushes-back-on-winning-quote-174317.html

With huge media fawning over Ted Cruz and his fellow America-haters, and the general eagerness of many in the public to side with their flashy stunts, this should be 100% for the far right. It's only mixed because they do things like have an old white man go and verbally abuse and shame a female park ranger.

Edited October 4, 2013 by DRW50

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

Max I think you're delusional if you think Al Sharpton is the leader of the Democratic Party. He most certainly is not. Perhaps the die hard dyed in wool liberals consider them a leader but I think if you polled today he wouldn't even get 6%. So that's just nonsense. Al Sharpton is completely unrealistic and has no kind of claim on the party.

As for Senator Warren I love her but she's barely polling at 10% in all the primary polls for 2016. Even WHEN you take Hillary Clinton out she's still trailing Joe Biden. Don't get me wrong she's amazing and I do suspect that a lot of the Democratic Party respects and definitely would get behind her as a candidate but that's not for many years. She's not going to run. She knows that and you know that.

It's Hillary's turn. And I'm down for the ride so I cannot wait

[marceline]

Here's the reason it's time to stop trying to find common ground with the hard right wing:

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/04/why-theyll-die-on-this-hill/

[quartermainefan]

I am all for stop and frisk. I have no scientific data as to why, but NY is the safest it has been in my lifetime with crime levels you have to go back to the early 1960s to find. What works works. Removing stop and frisk is fine as long as the people removing it agree that if removing beckons in a rise in crime then the only logical recourse is to reinstate it.

People can knock Bloomberg all they want but if anyone knows of a safer city per capita than NY I would be interested to know where that is.

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

I think NYC under De Blasio is gonna be a complete hot mess and I look forward to seeing how epic of a failure he is.

That city is gonna just crush him. Between Wall Street, the City Council, managing the crime rate, and his goals regarding education and income equality he's just in for a rude awakening.

I feel bad for Quinn after watching this New York Times behind the scenes documentary but in a way she ran a very weak campaign and deserved her loss. People have long memories and in a state like New York she should have known that vote was gonna cost her big time.

If only Weiner hadn't lied and had that scandal break out again I think he might have won....I honestly was rooting for him but when it all came back again I couldn't in good consciousness support him.....

Here's to hoping Terry wins in VA....

[quartermainefan]

Weiner is too stupid to be mayor. Anyone who would vote for him needs their head examined. Hillary is supposed to summon him and tell him he has to leave Huma or they will go all Vince Foster on his ass.