Althouse: 2 sides of what I say is the same post-election meme.

November 5, 2014

2 sides of what I say is the same post-election meme.

1. "Meet The Real Next Senate Majority Leader: Ted Cruz." Talking Post Memo.

2. "Republicans’ First Step Was to Handle Extremists in Party." New York Times.

29 comments:

Jaq said...: First things first, and the first thing is to nominate a new Goldstein to make the face of the Republican Party.; 11/5/14, 7:55 AM
Bob Boyd said...: Something is wrong with the first link.; 11/5/14, 7:57 AM
RecChief said...: Republicans’ First Step Was to Handle Extremists in Party." New York Times.

That would be good advice for the Democrat Party. Unfortunately for them, that would mean their base.; 11/5/14, 7:58 AM
rehajm said...: Aren't those 2 sides on the same side?; 11/5/14, 7:58 AM
Larry J said...: It's kind of amusing how so many of the TV talking heads are showing their bias by asking what the Republicans will do to work with Obama. I've yet to hear the first one ask what Obama will do to work with the Republicans. If he tries his "I won" line again, Republicans can answer "So did we - running against you!"; 11/5/14, 8:00 AM
Brando said...: I don't accept the premise that these wins empower the far right--if anything, Senators representing purplish states (Colorado, Iowa) and even the Red states that have run largely moderate campaigns aren't necessarily going to tack right. Plus, the larger the majority the more ideologically diverse it is, and the more that has to be done to keep it together.

Everyone is going to interpret the results to vindicate their own beliefs--of course Cruz will act like it's a mandate for his views. But there's a stronger argument that the GOP should be thinking towards 2016, and presenting an agenda that can take the White House and hold their gains.; 11/5/14, 8:01 AM
Jaq said...: Link for the google impaired.; 11/5/14, 8:04 AM
Brando said...: "It's kind of amusing how so many of the TV talking heads are showing their bias by asking what the Republicans will do to work with Obama. I've yet to hear the first one ask what Obama will do to work with the Republicans. If he tries his "I won" line again, Republicans can answer "So did we - running against you!""

Mainly Obama can't hide behind Reid anymore--it'll be pretty clear that if something doesn't get done, and Congress passes legislation that ends at the Prez desk, it'll be on Obama. Granted, he's not running for re-election, but he has incentive to look to his legacy (such as it is) and not drag his party further for 2016.

The biggest thing about yesterday though is the effect on judicial appointments. Reid getting rid of the filibuster for judgeships made it clear just how important Senate control is.; 11/5/14, 8:04 AM
rehajm said...: The Talkie talks are laying the groundwork for the president. At 2:30 Eastern Obama will come out swinging and more defiant than ever. He has a couple months to use his pen and phone and dare the new Congress to defy what he sows. He still has the media on his side, and he can still control the narrative after all.; 11/5/14, 8:05 AM
Anonymous said...: What the GOP needs to do is pass bills. Some of which are designed to be veto-proof and others intended to soften up Dem Senators for 2016 races.

- Keystone
- roll back of only the most egregious EPA over-reach
- Stronger Border Regs
- Ebola defense measures

drive a bigger wedge between Senate Dems and the WH.; 11/5/14, 8:05 AM
MadisonMan said...: In addition to passing bills, I think the GOP should also investigate the IRS. I don't see how this is a losing proposition, as no voter likes the IRS and they will like seeing it being investigated.

The GOP should curb its enthusiasm for other investigations, even though they rightly *could* be investigated to the detriment of Democrats (Benghazi, Guns in Mexico, etc), it could seem a little too interparty squabbling.; 11/5/14, 8:11 AM
paminwi said...: Drudge has a picture of Hilary looking like she is "the Incredible Shrinking Hilary" right now. When will they post a similar picture of Obama? Obama does not want to work with Republicans and that will be obvious as time goes on. (He may say some crap today at his press conference but I won't believe it!)

He thinks everyone but himself is stupid and he will do executive orders to do want he wants Ron Fournier says in a tweet if Obama does immigration executive action now it will be like giving the nation the finger. Doesn't he do that now, already? Why would he change?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DygBj4Zw6No; 11/5/14, 8:13 AM
kcom said...: "and not drag his party further for 2016"

I think he's too stubborn to worry about that. He hasn't learned much since he was elected about real leadership.; 11/5/14, 8:16 AM
SomeoneHasToSayIt said...: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.; 11/5/14, 8:19 AM
buwaya said...: Other take on this - it doesn't matter much. The real problems come from a degenerating culture which politics won't fix.
The next generations are worse (in terms of character and talents) than their predecessors, a little short term political blip means nothing.
Gramsci's long march hasn't been stopped, and won't be, because the real power is no longer in accessible political institutions.; 11/5/14, 8:19 AM
Brando said...: "In addition to passing bills, I think the GOP should also investigate the IRS. I don't see how this is a losing proposition, as no voter likes the IRS and they will like seeing it being investigated."

They absolutely should--and with an eye to passing some legislation reforming the IRS, perhaps setting up firewalls with political appointees, enhanced whistleblower statutes, something like that. I don't see how Obama could veto that, and the coverage will enhance the GOP.

Other moves would be tax reform and entitlement reform, but those are politically tricky. May need some bipartisan cover for those.

Perhaps also a package of regulator reforms, and a health reform law. The GOP would benefit a great deal if they had some health reforms to point to as a comparison with the relatively unpopular ACA. Use that issue going into the next cycle, and the Dems would be on their heels.; 11/5/14, 8:21 AM
Michael K said...: "I don't accept the premise that these wins empower the far right-"

Your entire premise is wrong. It is typical of the left, and I don;t know if you are on the left, to call the libertarian wing of the GOP, "Far Right." That is why they demonize the Tea Party. The Tea Party is the economic wing of the party and that is libertarian.

The social conservatives did not lose but they had little to do with the big win. Gay marriage and abortion are the law now. What is rejected is the over reach by leftist advocates who sue anyone that does not show enthusiastic support for the agenda.; 11/5/14, 8:22 AM
virgil xenophon said...: What buwaya puti @8:19 said!; 11/5/14, 8:26 AM
SGT Ted said...: The NYT headline, spinning this as a defeat for the Tea Party, was predicted by Rush.

Also expect to see spin how the election is a sign that the GOP needs to work with Obama to enact the Democrat agenda, rather than a repudiation of Democrats.; 11/5/14, 8:41 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "The GOP should curb its enthusiasm for other investigations, even though they rightly *could* be investigated to the detriment of Democrats (Benghazi, Guns in Mexico, etc), it could seem a little too interparty squabbling."

-- Benghazi I can see having to die on the vine of investigation; the good information is long gone, probably on the same hard drives that mysteriously failed for the IRS. The guns to Mexico can't be dropped. Hundreds of people died. Someone is accountable, and we need to find out who.; 11/5/14, 8:52 AM
David said...: Getting most of their base and potential base on the same page was important for the Republicans. As was candidate recruitment and selection, done with far more skill than in the past. Lots of women. And (have I mentioned this before?) first black US senator elected from a former confederate state since Reconstruction (where the black senators were all Republican as well.)

All this means very little in two years. But the Republicans have a diverse and large pack of potential candidates. The Democrats have Hillary (and Biden and Warren sorta kinda).

Eventually Obama and the Clintons will stop soaking up all Democratic attention, but probably not before the next election. It's not a plus for the Democrats that they are so dominated by so few people.; 11/5/14, 9:15 AM
Scott said...: One suggestion for the new GOP congress...

Restart the work on Yucca Mountain, with an eye towards opening it within the next 18 months. That would help along a real carbon-free energy source (nuclear) while giving Dirty Harry a major league middle finger of love...; 11/5/14, 9:17 AM
David said...: Dick Durbin for President. How does that sound?

Chuck Schumer?

Patrick Deval?

Look at the list of Democratic senators and governors. Pretty thin soup except for a couple of Californians, Brown and Feinstein. They are both old war horses. Who do the Democrats have who are young, fresh and can run from the center?

Someone might emerge, but right now it's not a strength of the party.; 11/5/14, 9:22 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "Aren't those 2 sides on the same side?"

It's a Democratic meme with 2 sides, 2 ways to present it. The meme is that the GOP harbors dangerous extremists. The 2 sides are: the extremist secretly hold and exercise power AND the mainstreamy moderates gave figure out how to control the visibility of extremist Republicans.; 11/5/14, 9:27 AM
Michael K said...: I think the XL Pipeline is now veto proof.

Major Obamacare changes that gut the law without changing the name are probably veto proof. Obama is toxic and Democrats have to run again.

Amnesty will probably be a huge issue and I don't see yet how to block it.

There are a lot of Democrats who have to look ahead now and there will be cooperation, I believe.; 11/5/14, 9:32 AM
Brando said...: "Your entire premise is wrong. It is typical of the left, and I don;t know if you are on the left, to call the libertarian wing of the GOP, "Far Right." That is why they demonize the Tea Party. The Tea Party is the economic wing of the party and that is libertarian."

Whether "far right" is the correct term, how is my premise--that the gains from yesterday if anything empower Republican moderates--incorrect? When you consider the messaging from the winning GOP candidates as well as the more "purple" constituencies they'll be representing, it's a perfectly valid premise.

Same thing happened to the Democrats when they had big gains in '06 and '08--these gains happened in swing states and districts, and made it harder to hold party unity in 2009 and 2010. That's why the stimulus, Obamacare and Cap 'n Trade had a number of Democratic moderates vote against such measures, while the GOP (as the smaller party) had near unity (or complete unity in the case of the ACA).

Being the majority party means you can run the agenda, but it also becomes more unwieldy.; 11/5/14, 12:17 PM
Jaq said...: I view the current pact with the Republican mainstream the same way I think Roosevelt viewed Stalin.

Hopefully we can defeat our common enemy and get down to the next fight.; 11/5/14, 3:24 PM
Douglas B. Levene said...: Others have made this point, but it seems to me that the size of the GOP win diminishes Cruz's leverage considerably.; 11/5/14, 7:37 PM
Scientific Socialist said...: If a Martian, knowing nothing about the election, read the NY Times' post-mortem coverage, he'd be shocked to subsequently learn that the S.S. Obama had been hit by two torpedoes amidships, leaving it aflame and taking on water fast.; 11/5/14, 8:54 PM