« Andrew Cuomo: What a difference a political opportunity makes (update). | kgb999's Blog | Can a psychologist be "disbarred"??? »
Harry Reid Smackdown - who got slapped?
I think the emerging belief that Harry Reid delivered a "smackdown" to liberal pressure groups is totally off base. Yeah, I think a smackdown was delivered. But some people have totally misidentified the smackee.
Sure, a statement like "this isn't helping" might seem a bit docile to consider a stinging rebuke. Not usually something that would send the mighty MoveOn cowering into the wings. But somehow, it has been seemingly brutal in it's effectiveness. So what makes this a huge smackdown? Well...
Bayh basically announced he wanted to bypass leadership and engage Obama directly. A coalition assembled to give him the strength to assert this plan (the MDWG or something? What the hell do ya call 'em?). Never followed these things really close, but I think that's kind of unusual in the senate. I don't get any impression the challenge is welcome - ceremonial acknowledgment as majority leader not withstanding.
Electorally, Reid doesn't want to lose the majority; he wants the majority to enact Obama's platform. Liberal pressure groups generally want the same. These groups backing off looks to me like a coordinated smackdown of Bayh's new troopers - who represent a clear and present danger to achieving shared goals (probably more so than the GOP). I don't think the plan ever was to hammer away at these senators for months.
Ads this early can't be to influence voters ... it's 60 days into the first session. This campaign perked up the ears of anyone thinking of mounting a primary challenge. There are some big-dollar groups involved here. Their support could make a serious difference in the decision by a challenger to run. I can't believe members of Bayh's little coalition haven't at least pondered this.
Now Reid steps up and politely mentions that the ad campaign wasn't helping and the groups back off? That seems like a pretty big message:"Being helpful is a gooood thing. Align with Bayh maybe Reid won't stick up for you next time." A statement the democratic leadership and left wing are in alliance. And the message gets sent without Reid having to scream or provoke a direct confrontation within the caucus - which also wouldn't be helpful.
Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I sort of detect some strategy. Will it work? Dunno. But it's a pretty strong opening response ... if somewhat un-flamboyant.
extra thought: if the left leaning groups really aren't bluffing and will support challenges - the challenger better get to work now if they expect to translate a successful primary into holding the seat ...
Sure, a statement like "this isn't helping" might seem a bit docile to consider a stinging rebuke. Not usually something that would send the mighty MoveOn cowering into the wings. But somehow, it has been seemingly brutal in it's effectiveness. So what makes this a huge smackdown? Well...
Bayh basically announced he wanted to bypass leadership and engage Obama directly. A coalition assembled to give him the strength to assert this plan (the MDWG or something? What the hell do ya call 'em?). Never followed these things really close, but I think that's kind of unusual in the senate. I don't get any impression the challenge is welcome - ceremonial acknowledgment as majority leader not withstanding.
Electorally, Reid doesn't want to lose the majority; he wants the majority to enact Obama's platform. Liberal pressure groups generally want the same. These groups backing off looks to me like a coordinated smackdown of Bayh's new troopers - who represent a clear and present danger to achieving shared goals (probably more so than the GOP). I don't think the plan ever was to hammer away at these senators for months.
Ads this early can't be to influence voters ... it's 60 days into the first session. This campaign perked up the ears of anyone thinking of mounting a primary challenge. There are some big-dollar groups involved here. Their support could make a serious difference in the decision by a challenger to run. I can't believe members of Bayh's little coalition haven't at least pondered this.
Now Reid steps up and politely mentions that the ad campaign wasn't helping and the groups back off? That seems like a pretty big message:"Being helpful is a gooood thing. Align with Bayh maybe Reid won't stick up for you next time." A statement the democratic leadership and left wing are in alliance. And the message gets sent without Reid having to scream or provoke a direct confrontation within the caucus - which also wouldn't be helpful.
Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I sort of detect some strategy. Will it work? Dunno. But it's a pretty strong opening response ... if somewhat un-flamboyant.
extra thought: if the left leaning groups really aren't bluffing and will support challenges - the challenger better get to work now if they expect to translate a successful primary into holding the seat ...
Advertisement
In regards to Reid, I can feel bone chilling cold, to luke warm, to giving him a reluctant high five, depending on the day and his actions.
While reading your post it occurred to me, fighting gridlock from the right is a daunting task. Doing the same on multiple fronts in your own party, must be a nightmare.
When all the evidence is presented and the final outcome is known, I may have to rethink my position on the Majority Leader.
April 1, 2009 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
See, KGB, I would really have to search to find something we disagree about.
How in the hell do you pass the kind of legislation presented by the New Administration, the biggest change in course for this nation since 1964-1965, without some real concerted effort by the party in control to work the system?
You know, we could have a young Ted Kennedy at the helm and he might not be able to accomplish what I think Senator Reid can.
April 1, 2009 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
DD, I find politics fascinating. I'm not a fan of Evan Bayh but he may be finding himself between a rock and a hard place.
One piece of legislation he supposedly opposes is the Cap and Trade Bill. Although, saying he opposes a bill that has yet to be written is probably disingenuous.
Anyhoo, the goal of the Cap and Trade Legislation is: "To steadily reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions economy-wide in a cost-effective manner."
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/01/capandtrade101.html
Now, here is just one of Mr. Bayh's problems. I've read that Indiana receives 90% of it's energy from coal fired plants, the very plants that produce pollution. I think it's fair to say, the wording of the bill would be of particular interest to Bayh since, this bill has the potential to be devastating to Indian's already depressed economy. Looking at Bayh's position from that angle could lead one to be sympathetic, towards his possible opposition.
Let's flip the script; he tends to win elections with the support of Republicans and he has an upcoming election he needs to start thinking about. Being seen as opposing Democratic ideas probably makes him more attractive, in the eyes of those supporters.
Yep, I find politics extremely fascinating. :)
April 1, 2009 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
M you really nail it here. Bill Moyers talks about getting out of college and working in the Texas legislature. You can imagine the wonderful speeches in the '50's in that wonderful legislative body. Any way he was listening to some terrible speech, probably a total racist given the floor, and Moyers turned to his employer and commented how terrible it was.
His boss turned to him and said:
If you think this is bad, you should see his constituents.
Ironic, probably not ha ha funny, but ironic.
April 1, 2009 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm drawn to irony like moth to a flame. LOL
I can oppose and or disagree with a politician or position but I'm always intrigued by the person that walks the tightrope of doing what's right, versus what's realistic.
April 1, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink