Skip to main content


U2 -- "New Year's Day"

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  At midnight, I not only toast the New Year (14+ / 0-)

    but to another year of this blog and good coverage of the upcoming VA and NJ elections.  Also, to a lesser extent, the toast will be to the death of the Bush tax cuts at midnight.  It was a long time coming and like any drug, it'll hurt for a while going cold turkey.  If it comes back, may it be in a form far less regressive and destructive to the deficit.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 02:46:39 PM PST

  •  On the whole, 2012 has been good for me (9+ / 0-)

    Here's to an even better 2013 for all DKEers!

    Ok, so I read the polls.

    by andgarden on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 03:27:56 PM PST

  •  What a great year (3+ / 0-)

    for Democratic elections junkies. Just wanted to shout and say and thanks to everyone here for all the breaking news, poll numbers, and smart analysis -- and for just keeping me sane through one of the most stressful elections I can remember.

    Happy New Year to all!

  •  I hope that PPP polls (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    James Allen, MichaelNY

    in Arkansas and West Virginia soon. Too bad they weren't choices this time. Will be interesting to see if like the PPP poll in Kentucky, whether Hillary puts these states in play in 2016 (also wishing her a speedy recovery), plus the Senate races in 2014 in those states.

    "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

    by SouthernINDem on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 06:10:35 PM PST

  •  question about Washington (state) (0+ / 0-)

    is Norm Dicks the last of the Warren Magnuson/Henry Jackson type of democrats? I guess Smith, who represents an adjoining district, isn't that much different from Scoop or Maggie.

    RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

    by demographicarmageddon on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 07:12:59 PM PST

    •  maybe in congress (0+ / 0-)

      I know regular people who I'd call Scoop Jackson Dems, though.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 10:01:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's been 2013 here for thirteen hours (7+ / 0-)

    Hurry up, slowpokes! ;)

    Happy New Year from Tokyo!

    Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

    by sapelcovits on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 07:58:55 PM PST

  •  Thoughts on the fiscal cliff deal? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DCCyclone, KingofSpades, Audrid, MichaelNY

    Just the electoral politics, mind, not the actual policy (we need that DKE Policy site, really).

    Republicans managed to get the votes scheduled for tomorrow rather than tonight, so we're technically going over the "cliff" since sequestration will take effect and the Bush tax cuts will expire at midnight (I'm not clear which midnight exactly; midnight in Washington, D.C., I assume). So they'll be able to claim they voted to cut taxes, not raise them. Are conservative interest groups and hard-boiled anti-tax folks going to buy that?

    Meanwhile, despite the fact that Vice President Biden successfully talked Sen. McConnell down much closer to President Obama's original proposal on income taxes than to Speaker Boehner's, as well as securing a one-year unemployment benefit extension and mostly shielding Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security from the cuts Republicans had demanded, some progressives in the blogosphere are already accusing the administration and Senate Democrats of caving. After all, the deal only puts off sequestration for two months and it doesn't raise (or kill) the debt ceiling, counter to many Democrats' demands. So we'll be back at this in two months or less.

    We're almost two years out from the 2014 midterms, and Obama II hasn't even started yet (nor has the 113th Congress, even). But we're heading into a 2013 election cycle that will feature a certain-to-be-nationalized gubernatorial race in Virginia and a likely-to-be-competitive Senate race in Massachusetts, and possibly others.

    Personally, I think this is a political win for Democrats. They've shown they won the election by getting the partial extension they wanted; I was fully prepared for the possibility of a deal at $1 million on the Bush tax cuts, so $400,000 isn't as disappointing to me (and therefore is less of a loss) than it is to some people. They'll also be able to go home without being confronted by constituents angry that they lost unemployment insurance or had their assistance programs (a.k.a. "entitlements", a word I don't particularly like) gutted. But Republicans avoided a potentially bigger loss by avoiding a total meltdown over the "fiscal cliff", since they would have almost certainly been blamed if we'd gone over it with no deal in sight.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 08:42:30 PM PST

    •  As Anderson Cooper just said (on the one night (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      when I'm ok with watching CNN): "it's getting to be the hour where bad things happen."

      Ok, so I read the polls.

      by andgarden on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 09:21:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think all that is waaaaay premature (4+ / 0-)

      There's no "political win" this long before the next election, especially when few issues are actually resolved.  Not even tax policy is resolved since it's still on the table, rates and all else in the Internal Revenue Code, in "tax reform" that may or may not be part of the next fight in a couple months.

      And that next fight is more important than this one.

      The only way this is a political win for Democrats this soon is if Boehner can't enough of his caucus to support it to feel comfortable bringing it to the floor for a vote, or if he brings it but the vote fails.  If the House scuttles it, then Boehner and his caucus are again exposed as a disaster, and that sticks in voters' minds as yet one more thing to consider going forward.

      (Keep in mind I'm reading that Senate Dems are on board, maybe not unanimously but this thing is going to pass the Senate with majorities of both sides voting yea.)

      Otherwise, the deal just punts for a couple months when they have to go through all this all over again.

      The major failure of Obama in this deal is surrending on a debt ceiling hike.  He should've conditioned a deal on Republicans disarming on that, or else punt into the new year.  Nothing was had tonight that couldn't be had in a week or two, and more than this was likely.

      Mind you I'm 100% in disagreement with liberals who complained he gave up too much in 2011.  They didn't realize how much he had his back to the wall, the court of public opinion wasn't really on his side...the midterms mattered.  But this time he really did surrender what didn't need to be surrendered, at least not this soon.  There is nothing magical about the calendar, employers don't change their employee tax withholdings right away anyway and any spending cuts are done only incrementally......so a week or two doesn't matter.

      Nothing in this deal will have any political consequences if it passes.  The consequences will come a couple months from now......if even then.

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 09:29:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Interestingly enough, Dems are putting the onus (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone, MichaelNY

        on the GOP with the debt ceiling:
        http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...

        Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

        by KingofSpades on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 10:02:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  If they really do that and stick to it... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades, tk421, MichaelNY

          ...then that's great.

          But it's politically very hard.

          The reason there's such a thing as a debt ceiling law at all is because a past Congress decided this should not be "automatic" as the TPM article says the White House now insists.

          If they do this, they're going to have to be incredibly disciplined on message.  The White House is capable of that, as are Senate and House Democratic leaders at times, but there is no conistent disciplined messaging from the rank-and-file, especially in the Senate.  And in the House, Pelosi and Hoyer too often are out of sync.  I'll never forget during the health care bill fight how one day Hoyer publicly said he didn't think a deal could get through the House with a public option, and then a day or two later Pelosi said a deal couldn't get through without it.  That was a jaw-dropping mess, coming from the top two players on the same damn team!

          Democrats have to push the simple message that the debt ceiling must be hiked because it's the only way to operate government at all, to get social security checks cut and all else the public actually does demand.

          And worse yet, Democrats have to be willing to go over the debt ceiling cliff because Boehner et al. might just let it happen for a day or two or three.  Will Landrieu, Pryor, Begich in the Senate, and Matheson and Barrow in the House, all stomach that without going on TV to bash their own party, instead of bashing Republicans?

          It would've been easier IMO to go over the current cliff with a debt ceiling requirement as a condition of a deal, then to go through the risk of actually hitting the ceiling and grinding government to a near-halt.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 10:18:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Exactly. Fiscal Cliff was very easy to go over... (0+ / 0-)

            GOP was being blamed by in large and any damage could have retroactively been undone and it would have shown Dem resolve and that Obama won't always cave.  

            But if Obama is willing to cave on the fiscal cliff, you can be damn sure he'll cave on the debt ceiling.  

            The NRA is the Gun Manufacturer Lobby. Nothing more. Their pontification about the second amendment is nothing more than their ad jingle. They're the domestic version of the Military Industrial Complex.

            by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:52:51 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  He didn't on the former (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, DCCyclone

              so your point is moot.  

              Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

              by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:49:50 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Do you not see an advantage over a fight (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              itskevin, MichaelNY

              About the debt ceiling on one side and preserving Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid on the other? I think people tend to forget that the GOP doesn't really want to default either. This is where the polls cited frequently on the FP become really powerful. There is the potential here for an almighty dangerous trap for Republicans.

              "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

              by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:27:14 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  I guess they could count on (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            the GOP's financial giant financiers to pressure them to fold in the end.

            Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

            by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:50:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I suspect in the end it'll work out like this deal (5+ / 0-)

            Let's face it: we've now had four rounds of this kind of fiscal battle: December 2010, March 2011, July 2011, and now December 2012. Each time you get frantic rounds of negotiating and teeth-gnashing, Republicans screaming about spending cuts, Democrats freaking out about entitlement cuts... and in the end, you end up getting least-common denominator deals that just punt most of the bigger questions till later.

            It's a terrible way of governing, but there is logic to it. We have highly polarized parties, a political system with a huge number of veto points, which means that the default state of action (with divided government) is gridlock. But gridlock doesn't mean that the government doesn't still have to fund things. And so you get these punctuated crises, and with each side trying to win a decisive battle, it never seems to happen. Instead, each crisis ends with a deal that everyone hates, but which actually addresses almost none of the bigger issues, and then punts on everything else.

            I'm annoyed by the deal as much as anybody, but I suspect the next round - which is going to start up almost immediately - is going to end up with something like a 1-year lifting of the debt ceiling, a partial offsetting of the sequester, and some small revenue increases (through closing deductions) in the neighborhood of $200-300 bil., and some similarly-sized cuts to Medicare providers. Then we'll go through another debt-ceiling/government shutdown debate in 2014 with similar results.

            •  Pressed "ok" to quickly... (7+ / 0-)

              ... but just to conclude things (though this may be redundant), it essentially means that we're locked into a cycle of tit-for-tat, last-minute, least-common denominator deals. It won't make anyone happy, and it's hugely suboptimal. But it's arguably better than nothing. In the end, we've actually gotten fairly little austerity at the federal level (in contrast to Europe) because of constant punts on cuts and stimulus tax policies expiring. We'll slowly see the deficit whittled down. And military spending will fall.

              The flip side is we won't see real -- and necessary -- revenue increases for quite some time. What the experience basically shows is that contrary to the myth of the Grand Bargain, the only way you're going to get a balanced, "centrist" entitlement-reform and revenue-raising tax reform bill is going to be when Democrats again hold the trifecta. Both the 1993 Budget Reconciliation Act and the ACA are the relevant precedents.

      •  Fair points, although I dont think (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, askew

        the debt ceiling could have been resolved outside of a grand bargain, meaning chained CPI, Medicare cuts, etc. The flip side of that is Dems probably would have gotten more revenue in a longer term deal.

        Overall, I'm happy with the deal. I expected some give on the 250k threshold as well, and am glad it wasnt higher than 450k. UI and extending some of the stimulus tax credits is good as well.  

        I'm not thrilled with the sequester being pushed back only two months.

        But I dont really see why that's bad news for Obama. The GOP dislikes the sequester as much as the Dems do, so I dont think it really gives GOP that much leverage. Plus on the revenue side, Obama gets his gains locked in permanently. I really worried about a 30-60-90 day deal on tax rates.  

        The debt ceiling fight does worry me though.  

        •  Their debt ceiling leverage is only as good (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, MichaelNY

          As their willingness to lay out what they want to cut. I easily see a situation developing where Obama uses the inauguration and State of the Union to accuse the Republicans of favoring the gutting of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid over the economy and credit rating of the United States. Democrats can win that debate in the court of public opinion far easier than getting tax increases out of the House of Representatives.

          "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

          by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:12:54 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The debt ceiling thing worries me a lot (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            But it's worth pointing out that for all the sound and fury last time around, in the end, no entitlements were actually cut with the conclusion of the debt ceiling debate. And it's not clear to me why they're in any way in a stronger position two months from now - with a smaller majority in the House, a smaller minority in the Senate, having just lost the presidential race, and with the economy stronger - than they were in the summer of 2011.

            •  Agreed (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tk421, jncca, MichaelNY

              You know we really do need a DKE policy sub-site setting up. Even the people I disagree with here are approachable and open to sensible conversation without motivations being questioned and name calling. At least most of the time. I hope somebody who has more time than me can approach David about it.

              "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

              by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:58:20 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  The other big advantage we have this time (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              jncca, MichaelNY

              is Republicans will be screaming about the Pentagon sequester at the same time.

    •  A new record might be set (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingTag, jj32, MichaelNY

      if approved: technically, there might be the shortest lived tax increase in history.  Will my change be given back retroactively?

      And with the expiration dates of congressional terms, this would be one of the last acts passed with House Budget Committee Ranking Democrat Chris Van Hollen as my Congressman; on Thursday John Delaney takes that position after election in the changed districts.

      37, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

      by Mike in MD on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 10:21:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Happy New Year! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, Audrid, MichaelNY, itskevin

    It's been a great year for progressives and Democratic political junkies like us. I'm glad I finally started posting here on Kos, after years of lurking. This is an excellent site with an excellent community. It's done a lot for progressive causes, and while 2012 was a pretty awful year for me personally, I'm happy it was a positive year for progressives, thanks to the efforts of activists and sites like DK.

    Every New Year's Eve, I blast one of my favorite albums by my favorite band: the live album Rock of Ages by The Band. It was recorded New Year's Eve 1971-1972, and culminates with this brilliant organ solo from keyboardist Garth Hudson, played at the stroke of midnight.

    Student, Proud Progressive, Science Nerd, and Skeptic. Born and raised in CT-03.

    by betelgeux on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 10:11:31 PM PST

  •  Toasted the new year Maryland-style (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, The Caped Composer

    Poured a six-pack of Natty Boh (local parlance for National Bohemian Beer) into my 2-liter German beer boot and consumed it as fast as I could.

    37, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

    by Mike in MD on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 10:12:50 PM PST

  •  whatever happened to the new south democrats? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    betelgeux, MichaelNY, Taget

    it seems like the 1970s were a fascinating time in southern politics. Most of the reactionary southern democrats were dying off and were replaced by a new breed of southern democrats that could build biracial coalitions and bridge the gap between the southern and national parties.

    It seems that era saw an influx of a lot of those types like Dale Bumpers, Wyche Fowler, Jim Sasser, Al Gore, David Pryor and Clinton himself. Even Zell Miller was a democrat of that mold for the majority of his career.

    Why do you think they all of a sudden started dying off in the 90s? Was it that they were merely a damn and couldn't hold the floodgates anymore?

    RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

    by demographicarmageddon on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 11:07:34 PM PST

    •  I suspect some of the GOP mythology is correct (7+ / 0-)

      Let me elaborate:

      Many liberals and Democrats would argue that it was Civil Rights. And certainly that was a big part of it, instantly making the South competitive and swinging a huge chunk of the white vote to Republicans.

      That being said that isn't the entire story. Republicans often claim the South swung to them because of the Cold War, Reagan, and a reaction against northern liberals. They way overstate the case - civil rights was absolutely the biggest factor - but I suspect they aren't entirely incorrect.

      One big reason that people bring up is that the older generation of dyed-in-the-wool Democrats died off and younger voters were more likely to be Republicans. That's definitely part of the reason, but it isn't entirely explanatory. Southern Democrats actually did quite well with younger white voters, sometimes even better.

      I suspect that if the issue were purely civil rights, Democrats could have held onto a larger chunk of the white Southern vote. But the net effect of the 60s was to place northern liberals in a much stronger position vis-a-vis the national party, and I suspect it was the Democrats' increasing cultural identification with national liberals did make non-racialist-but-conservative Southern white voters feel more out-of-place. The antiwar movement also played a role in this.

      Moreover, Reagan's popularity in the South played a part in flipping a generation of southerners to the right. And ironically, rising prosperity in the south and increasing suburbanization also had the effect of making a lot of white southerners more natural Republicans.

      Lastly, there was the rise of the Christian Right, which was a non-factor prior to the late 1970s/early 1980s, and which was probably the other major factor besides race pushing the south towards the Republicans.

      Now, I should stress again that the key factor was civil rights. But absent some of these other factors -- say, a successful, two-term Carter presidency and Democrats presiding over the end of the Cold War -- the South might have remained more competitive.()

      ( Of course, parts of the South - particularly the Atlantic South - Fl, VA, and NC - ARE competitive today, but I might more broadly and in older strongholds, like Tennessee.)

      •  Yes, the other issues were contributors (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BeloitDem, MichaelNY

        but mainly race was and has been the issue in most of the South for pretty much ever.

        ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

        by James Allen on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:46:37 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  i always thought that a lot of southerners (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen

        saw civil rights, gay rights, environmentalism, feminism as one of the same and part of some grand design concocted by Herbert Marcuse.

        RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

        by demographicarmageddon on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:01:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The abject disaster of the Carter presidency (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        did not help things any, even if Clinton/Gore types did survive another 20 years.

        Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

        by tommypaine on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 01:53:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Weirdly, defections made BOTH parties more RW (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BeloitDem

          ... in the South.

          Even up until the 1990s, you had the South sending mostly electing conservative, but center-right Democrats who often were at least progressive on civil rights and even some social issues. The Southern Democratic base consisted of a solid minority of white voters, mostly working-class, whose conservative instincts were mitigated by the more liberal national party and the black vote.

          On the other side, you had Southern Republicans, whose base was mostly the elite, suburban business community. These people were conservatives, but they were a little bit more practical and less anti-government than the current base. They were also mostly mainline Protestant and often had business and social ties with non-southerners, making them more socially liberal. Even in the 1990s, many Southern Republicans identified as pro-choice, for example.

          The flip of the southern white-working class to the Republicans had the weird effect of making both parties more conservative in the region. By taking over the southern Republican Party, they pushed that faction to the right, made it more socially-conservative, and were through numerical dominance and revived racial polarization in voting, able to swing the political spectrum in that direction. Southern Democrats were thereby reduced to a rump faction, mostly relying on black voters, yet needing to strike even more conservative stances in order to credibly compete with the newly empowered Republicans.

  •  Fiscal cliff deal passes Senate 89-8 (7+ / 0-)

    One of the no votes was Rubio. Looking towards 2016.

    I would think that margin puts a lot of pressure on the House to pass the bill as is.

  •  I wonder what the one elector in 2004 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Audrid, MichaelNY, jj32, Taget

    that was supposed to vote for John Kerry in Minnesota that cast their vote for John Edwards thinks of that now?

    "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

    by SouthernINDem on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 04:24:07 AM PST

  •  Did anyone else watch the Rose Parade? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DrPhillips, KingofSpades

    I loved the Dinosaur float.

  •  I was joking the other day that (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, MichaelNY

    any fiscal deal will involve tax rate increases, and that the WH should repeatedly thank Mitch McConnell for ensuring passage.

    Well, it does look like McConnell played a critical role, his KY colleague, Rand Paul, voted no, the right(and left for that matter) seem to hate the bill, so it will be interesting to see if there is talk of a primary challenge. Not that I think it would be successful but KY is a state where the tea party seems pretty active in various races.

    •  As you correctly pointed out to Armando (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, MichaelNY

      Activists on the right hate it as much as those on the left. That being said I have a harder time seeing McConnell toppled than say Saxby Chambliss.

      "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

      by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:15:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Armando... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, MichaelNY

        ... I will just say that I remember him getting into fights with people on his threads when he was a front pager seven years ago.

        I've over the past year tuned out a lot of the blogosphere and left-wing talk shows and I'm frankly a lot better off for it. I read the papers, I read the wonky blogs, I debate these things with some close friends (in person or over email), but removing myself from internet flame wars dramatically increased my peace of mind.

        •  I dipped in over the last couple days (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Since it is generally verboten here except in open threads. I had to defend my friend in that particular instance.

          "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

          by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:02:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  he has aged gracefully. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:12:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, Chambliss and Graham (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, MichaelNY

        I said I thought they were pretty safe from a primary challenger unless they vote for a tax increase, in which you could see multiple strong candidate emerge.

        But it depends on what happens with the debt ceiling and also immigration reform.

        If it's perceived conservatives didnt win anything in the whole budget debate(fiscall cliff, FY 2013 budget, debt ceiling, etc), then I think those senators will get a strong primary challenge. Especially for Graham, if he also votes for a potential immigration deal.

        •  I don't see what they got themselves so far (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          I understand the argument they've maybe, possibly got less bad deals than they expected though I'm not really in that camp. But considering the fight is often on their turf then I'd call call the result somewhat of a reversal of the usual Overton window situation.

          "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

          by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:10:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  yeah, in this round, I dont think (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            GOP got much, if anything. But I do think Obama is trying build to a grand bargain, step by step since he couldnt get it in one bill, and he could use the various cliffs that are coming up to do that. I think Obama wants a grand bargain that is 1 trillion in spending cuts, 1 trillion in revenue. Right now, if we look at it like a running total, Obama has 600 billion or so in revenue, and GOP has zero in spending cuts. That means, the next deal will probably have more spending cuts than revenue, but again, that might be fine with the president. It can be part of the grand bargain and he can get a debt ceiling hike out of it as well.

            I wont comment on the substance of that, since it's DKE, but I think that's the political strategy.

            That's why I say, after all these various budget cliffs we face, if the tea party is as upset as they are now, I think you could see the approvals for Graham and Chambliss weakened to a point where multiple candidates could win a primary against them.

  •  Interested to see how Markey votes on cliff vote (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    or how Capuano votes for that matter.  Because if this becomes a shit sandwich come debt ceiling hostage taking in March, the vote on this deal now will come front and center.  

    President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:55:11 AM PST

    •  Whatever happens I imagine quite a few votes (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, itskevin, MichaelNY

      Might come back to haunt people.

      "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

      by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:04:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Biden said no negotiating on debt ceiling (3+ / 0-)

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:05:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  in the general no reason to vote against, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      don't let Brown be able to use this to claim he's more moderate.  Only matters in the primary, and I'd still say it's safer to vote in favor.

      However, if I were anyone else I'd be strongly tempted to vote against, the primary reason being to give Boehner more work in trying to find Republican votes, and to give one more Republican the opportunity to face the wrath of their base.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:20:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Internal poll had Rick Berg ahead 50-44 (9+ / 0-)

    the weekend before election day:
    https://twitter.com/...

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:06:39 PM PST

  •  House Republicans outdoing themselves (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, jj32, itskevin

    According to various Political Wire posts.

    "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

    by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:31:04 PM PST

  •  Is Boehner really so incompetent.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32

    that he would poison the Senate bill's chances of passage:
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/...

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 12:33:11 PM PST

  •  I always thought a 1998 scenario (5+ / 0-)

    Depended on impeachment redux but this GOP House might just be crazy enough to make their own gerrymandering obsolete.

    "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

    by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 01:00:50 PM PST

  •  I know this would never happen but (6+ / 0-)

    with Dems having 201 votes in the next Congress, I really wish they could find 17 Reps and, combined, that coalition could elect someone speaker. Kind of like what has happened in legislatures in NY and WA.

    The choice would have to be a Republican, maybe, Rep. Tom Cole. Someone who could actually negotiate in good faith and make a deal that's good for the country or, if they cant do that, at least know to get out of the way and let the House vote on something the Senate passes, especially in a crisis.

    Boehner cant do either. He walked away from a grand bargain that House GOP probably would love to have at this point and which probably would have been better for the economy and then after begging the Senate to do their job(which they did, in overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion), he cant even put that bill to a vote.

    •  It might be for the good of the country (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, betelgeux

      Long term. Short term it is beyond painful.

      "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

      by conspiracy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 01:14:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, SaoMagnifico

        The current situation isnt exactly great. A grand bargain deal could be substantively better. Permanent tax rate hikes(which of course this deal has), but also more manageable spending cuts, no sequester(or at least one that isnt as severe), and some debt ceiling hike.

        That would be better for the short term and long term  economy.

        And I fear I've veered too far into policy, and I apologize.

        Getting back to the politics of a coalition in the House. I doubt there are enough Republicans to make happen. But I would think all Dems would be on board, since the alternative is worse for them.

    •  It's possible that enough Republicans (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades

      will cast protest votes that Pelosi can be elected a minority Speaker.

      Highly unlikely, but possible.

      24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

      by HoosierD42 on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:35:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Really, really, _really_ unlikely! (0+ / 0-)

        To the point that it really sounds like an alternate reality. Nothing would unite the Republicans more than the prospect of a Democratic Speaker, let alone Pelosi!

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:24:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  AL-Gov 1962: Lookie what I found here... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, PassionateJus

    During the '62 election, state judge George Wallace used this comic his campaign mailed out to help him win the Democratic primary: http://www.ep.tc/...

    It's 16 pages long and it's quite interesting to read.  It's also sad in a way.  In it, Wallace tells the story about how he grew up on a farm, experienced crushing poverty during the Depression, and did lots of menial jobs to help him get through college and become someone just so he could use his skills as a lawyer and judge to keep people of color down.  There's a page about all he's done to protect veterans' benefits while he jumped through hoops to keep black people from voting and being granted equal protection under the law.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 04:14:14 PM PST

  •  PA-GOV: Corbett to sue NCAA over (4+ / 0-)

    Penn State sanctions.

    This doesnt really seem like a smart move to me. Unless, I guess, if it's more a technical issue regarding the financial penalties.

    I wonder what Kathleen Kane will say about this. She hasnt been sworn in yet as AG.

    link

  •  House is voting on Senate bill unamended soon. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32

    Just an FYI.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:37:32 PM PST

  •  House passes fiscal cliff bill (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades

    It passes 218 votes. Some still havent voted.

  •  The final vote is 257-167 for passage (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    ~85 GOPers vote Yea, all others Nay
    ~170 Dems vote Yea

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 08:02:21 PM PST

  •  House members voting no (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, MichaelNY

    Schmidt, Rohrabacher, Wolf, Wilson (SC), Young (IN), Roe, McClintock, Myrick, Gowdy, Flake, Cantor, McCarthy, Terry, Southerland, Marchant, Lummis, Neugebauer, Stutzman, Nunes, Quayle, Massie, West, Westmoreland, Walsh, Chaffetz, Blackburn, Akin, Amodei, Amash, Culberson, Brooks, Burgess, McHenry, Fleming, Gravees, Duncan (SC), Farenthold, Gosar, Issa, Jones, Jordan, Mack , McKinley, Pence, Rehberg, Adams, Ellmers, Jordan, King  

  •  Paul Ryan voted yes (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, LordMike, MichaelNY

    I'm sure his fans are feeling betrayed.

    26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

    by DrPhillips on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 08:13:13 PM PST

  •  wow, House wont vote on Sandy Relief bill (6+ / 0-)

    Steny Hoyer reporting this on the House floor. No more votes in this Congress. Will have to wait for the 113th Congress.

    Hoyer is pissed. Says he hopes the decision is reconsidered.

    Wonder how this affects Christie's opinions of the House GOP.

  •  Markey, Capuano, Lynch all vote "yes" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, LordMike, MichaelNY

    on fiscal cliff bill. Brown voted yes on it yesterday.

    So this bill wont get much talk during the MA-SEN primary. Unless Downing or someone else makes opposition to it an issue.

  •  All the GOP members from Indiana voted no, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    except lame duck Dan Burton (R-Crazy), who did not even show up. Buschon (R-Newburgh) is thinking about a primary challenge again, Pence is thinking about a 2016 Presidential bid, and the others are thinking about running for the U.S. Senate in 2016. Also, one of the 16 Dems voting no was Pete Visclosky (D-Merrilleville).

    "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

    by SouthernINDem on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 08:52:53 PM PST

  •  FWIW, conservative blogs seem to all hate the bill (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, MichaelNY

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:06:30 PM PST

    •  Well duh (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades

      It doesn't kick the unemployed to the curb and taxes go up. Really, though, Republicans got 100 billion in tax cuts that Obama campaigned against and didn't have to give them, while leaving the Pentagon sequester as out only remaining piece of leverage, so it's a mixed bag as far as I'm concerned.

      •  The leverage is in being seen to defend (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, KingofSpades

        Popular spending that people don't want to be cut. Any deal would be imperfect but this one gets a Democratic B grade for me to the Republican D.

        "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

        by conspiracy on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 04:54:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Regional divides (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, MichaelNY

    Interestingly that almost all of the North Eastern republicans voted for the bill; everyone but Scott Garrett (NJ) and Frank Guinta of (NH). Most of the Pennsylvania republicans voted aye too.

    Nearly all the 'moderates' voted aye as well: Emerson, Biggert, Bono, Dold, Hanna, Hayworth, Platts, and Ros Lehtinen. Only Hanna and IRL will be back, however.

    •  Rep. Wolf also voted against (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jncca, MichaelNY

      If you consider NoVa to be the Northeast (I do).

      Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

      by SaoMagnifico on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:27:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You could call it that (3+ / 0-)

        But today I heard on my car radio about the first same-sex marriages performed in Maryland which was supposedly "the first Southern state to legalize same sex marriage."  My eyes almost rolled down the street.  

        18th century Mason-Dixon line aside, MD isn't really a Southern state and hasn't been for a long time, and the Southern-oriented parts of the state voted against it.  Mind you, I'm not bashing the South, but marriage equality's Southern breakthrough will have to come elsewhere.

        37, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

        by Mike in MD on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:49:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Interestly Petri was the only member (0+ / 0-)

    of the Wisconsin delegation to vote no. Not how I'd expect things to break down.

  •  Could he be worried about a primary challenge (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeloitDem, MichaelNY

    after the GOP added Ozaukee County to his district in redistricting?

    "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

    by SouthernINDem on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:27:55 PM PST

    •  I think Petri is reasobably well entrenhed (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, James Allen

      The best comparison is a slightly more conservative Fred Upton. The one person who I think could give him a real run for his money (State Senator Glenn Grothman) is probably waiting for Sensenbrenner to retire, if he wants in Congress at all.

  •  Oregon reps voted 3-2 against (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, MichaelNY

    Reps. Bonamici and Walden were the only two to support the bill. Rep. Blumenauer opposed it from the left; not sure about Reps. Schrader and DeFazio, who are hard to pin down ideologically (especially DeFazio).

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:29:59 PM PST

  •  5 Interesting Votes (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GloFish, BeloitDem, MichaelNY

    1. Tom Latham: He's in a swing district and is a major Boehner ally, yet he voted no.

    2. Joe Pitts: Very conservative, but voted yes.

    3. Don Manzullo: See Pitts.

    4. Lynn Jenkins, Mike Turner, Scott Rigell, Frank Wolf, Sean Duffy, Erik Paulsen, Shelley Moore Capito, David McKinley: All very sane Republicans voting no.  Paulsen isn't running for Senate in 2014 it looks like.  McKinley may be interested in Senate though.  Duffy and Rigell are still in swingy districts, but Rigell's is defense-heavy.

    5. Xavier Becerra, Kevin McCarthy, Eric Cantor: Leadership members voting against their party's leaders.

    20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
    politicohen.com
    Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
    UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

    by jncca on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:37:17 PM PST

    •  Perhaps (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, James Allen

      Capito voted no to help ward off the freedom works and Club for Growth crazies that will soon descend on her in 2014.

      Manzullo is retiring and he's old so no real chance of a comeback; maybe voting yes was a last favor to Boehner.

      I think McCarthy and Cantor want to be speaker and voting no will help with the far right of the caucus.

      I have no idea on Becerra or Latham (who probably thinks he's safe).

      Gary Miller voted yes. Maybe he's finally realized he's in a heavily democratic district.

  •  Opposing it from the Left were (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeloitDem, jj32, MichaelNY

    I presume Rosa DeLauro, Xavier Becerra, Jim McDermott, Bobby Scott, and Earl Blumenauer.

    I think its safe to assume Collin Peterson, Jim Matheson, Mike McIntyre, Jim Cooper, Kurt Schrader, Pete Visclosky and John Barrow opposed it from the right.

    What about Adam Smith, Jim Moran and DeFazio? I heard Moran say he was concerned about the $250,000 threshold for tax increases. (he wanted it higher because he represents a wealthy district). But his speech on the floor was all over the place criticizing the deal from both the left and the right.

  •  Boehner channels Cheney (6+ / 0-)

    http://www.politico.com/...

    It was only a few days before the nation would go over the fiscal cliff, no bipartisan agreement was in sight, and Reid had just publicly accused Boehner of running a “dictatorship” in the House and caring more about holding onto his gavel than striking a deal.

    “Go f— yourself,” Boehner sniped as he pointed his finger at Reid, according to multiple sources present.

    Reid, a bit startled, replied: “What are you talking about?”

    26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

    by DrPhillips on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 09:52:17 PM PST

  •  Cool map on the vote from NYT (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, KingofSpades, James Allen

    http://politics.nytimes.com/...

    Interestingly, Becerra was the ONLY California Dem to vote against the bill, although neither Lynn Woosley or Pete Stark Showed up.

  •  Primaries (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    I think this vote will very much allow some primary challengers to win against Republican incumbents. It will be the new stimulus bill: "YOU weren't conservative enough".

    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

    by wwmiv on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:50:05 PM PST

    •  House Republicans yea that could get primaried: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, James Allen

      (I think):

      Buck McKeon
      Lamar Smith
      Bill Thornberry
      Rodney Alexander
      Reid Ribble
      Bill Johnson
      Harold Rogers
      Dan Benishek
      John Sullivan
      Tom Cole
      Frank Lucas

      In addition, I hope but don't think that Jaime Herrera Beutler will get a challenge on this. That district has a history of local moderate Republicanism.

      23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

      by wwmiv on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 11:55:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Rep. Cole definitely has a big target on his back (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, James Allen

        Rep. Sullivan already lost in the primary last year. He's a lame duck.

        The others -- a challenge would surprise me. But damn, I actually had to look some of these people up. Rep. Frank Lucas has got to be in strong contention for "most invisible congressperson", despite the fact that he apparently chairs Agriculture and has been in office since 1994.

        Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

        by SaoMagnifico on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 01:20:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Good catch (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          I should have realized that.

          23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

          by wwmiv on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 02:42:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Lamar Smith especially (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, James Allen

          I think Lamar Smith might get a big challenge after his championing of anti-civil liberties SOPA/PIPA (the opposition to which was truly bi-partisan in the real world) in addition to his vote for "raising taxes" here.

          Unfortunately, it won't do anything to make the seat competitive as it is a hugely McCain/Romney area.  

          23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

          by wwmiv on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 02:44:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Note (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            That the strongest challenger to Gallego's - 2008 TX-23 nominee  Lyle Larson - state house district is split between the 23rd and the 21st and he's been elected from a larger land mass from a County Commissioner seat (Seat 3 - of 4 - which is basically the entire north quarter of the county, with almost the entirety of the 21st's section of Bexar County included).  If Smith looks vulnerable at any point, Larson might use the smell of blood to challenge Smith instead of Gallego.

            Interestingly, he'd probably get alot of youth Democratic support because of the SOPA/PIPA stuff.

            23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

            by wwmiv on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 02:49:04 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Lucas was my choice for (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, James Allen, R30A

          most generic Congressman on the Republican side when the the topic came up (I'm not sure if it was here) a while ago. For the Democrats, my choice was Sam Farr.

    •  I thought no Rs voted for the stimulus? (0+ / 0-)

      TARP perhaps?

      Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

      by sapelcovits on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 04:03:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site