washington, dc

The Democratic Strategist

Political Strategy for a Permanent Democratic Majority

Month: August 2012

Kilgore, on ‘Todd Akin, Superstar’

From TDS Managing Editor Ed Kilgore’s Washington Monthly post, “Todd Akin, Superstar‘ at the Washington Monthly:

So the big question in Politicsland this afternoon is how and why Todd Akin was able to convince himself to defy the entire GOP establishment of his state, the GOP presidential nominee, the major national campaign funders, and nearly the entire Right-Wing commentariat, and stay on the ballot in Missouri. Is he crazy? Is he bluffing?

Read the whole post here.


Akin as Poster-Boy for GOP’s Medieval Medicine, Junk Science

Silly me, thinking Todd Akin probably had just enough sense to get out of the Missouri Senate race yesterday. And despite Akin’s walkback of his twisted remarks about rape, the birds & bees, which smells an awful lot like a ‘jailhouse conversion,’ the draft GOP platform indicates that his unchanged policy prescriptions aren’t all that far out of the Republican party’s ‘mainstream.’ As an editorial in yesterday’s New York Times, puts it:

In passages on abortion, the draft platform puts the party on the most extreme fringes of American opinion. It calls for a “human life amendment” and for legislation “to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.” That would erase any right women have to make decisions about their health and their bodies. There are no exceptions for victims of rape or incest, and such laws could threaten even birth control.
The draft demands that the government “not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage,” which could bar abortion coverage on federally subsidized health-insurance exchanges, for example.
The platform praises states with “informed consent” laws that require women to undergo medically unnecessary tests before having abortions, and “mandatory waiting periods.” Those are among the most patronizing forms of anti-abortion legislation. They presume that a woman is not capable of making a considered decision about abortion before she goes to a doctor…

Since Akin will be around for a little while, at least, he will serve as the poster-boy for the GOP’s medieval notions about female biology and women’s health rights. And no, the term ‘medieval’ is not that much of a stretch, as Vanessa Heggie writes in her article in the Guardian, “‘Legitimate rape’ – a medieval medical concept: The idea that rape victims cannot get pregnant is a very old medical theory“:

The legal position that pregnancy disproved a claim of rape appears to have been instituted in the UK sometime in the 13th century. One of the earliest British legal texts, Fleta, has a clause in the first book of the second volume stating that: “If, however, the woman should have conceived at the time alleged in the appeal, it abates, for without a woman’s consent she could not conceive.”

Heggie cites other examples in more recent centuries. Junk science dies hard — especially in today’s Republican party.
The media is loving having Akin as poster-boy for the worst instincts of the GOP. And Democrats, not just Sen. McCaskill, are gratified that he keeps Republican lunacy on the front pages. But there may be a downside for Dems. Ed Kilgore notes in his Washington Monthly post on “Todd Akin, Superstar,”

…Thanks to the scorn and mockery he has now attracted, this relatively obscure congressman whom I’d bet half the pundits discussing his fate today had barely heard of before his primary win, is a National Superstar, the very embodiment of the Christian Right’s all-too-often abandoned determination to stand up to GOP pols who forever pay them lip service but rarely deliver the goods.

The media loves a buffoon, and it’s possible that Akin will hang in there long enough to serve as a distraction, deflecting media attention from Romney and Ryan, who espouse essentially the same policies as Akin. Much depends on the MSM, as well as the progressive press, making the connection between the views of the GOP ticket and the party’s loon du jour.


New Book Reveals Stats That Could Help Dems, Especially with Seniors

At AFL-CIO Now, editor Tula Connell addresses a central question of the 2012 campaign, “Republican or Democratic President? Which Is Better for Your Pocketbook?” with some facts Dems would be smart to master in the weeks ahead. In her review of a new book, “Bulls, Bears and the Ballot Box: How the Performance of Our Presidents Has Impacted Your Wallet” by Bob Deitrick and Lew Goldfarb, Connell explains:

Let’s say you had $100,000 in a 401(k) account in 1993, at the beginning of President Clinton’s eight years in office, and had withdrawn it in 2001 when he left. You would have amassed $341,894. If you invested the same amount in 2001, when President George W. Bush took office, and withdrawn it eight years later, you actually would have lost money, holding only $64,990…a difference of $277,000 between the two presidential terms.

The book was obviously published before President Obama finished his first term. But it does include evaluations for the last 13 presidents, with their criteria explained. You can see evaluations for each one by clicking on the widget at the top of this webpage. Further, adds Connell:

Topping the list for boosting the nation’s finances under this ranking are John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson–combined because Kennedy did not finish his term. Second place is a tie between Franklin Roosevelt and Bill Clinton. The highest-ranking Republican is Dwight Eisenhower, who created the national (read: federal government-funded) interstate system, Goldfarb said. The lowest of all: Hoover.

Although unemployment statistics, especially the monthly rate, get ample media coverage and attention from voters, the authors believe smart voters should pay attention to other indicators. As Connell quotes Deitrick and Goldfarb,

We believe that readers need to understand that whom they decide to vote for is very important to their personal bottom line, to their net worth and to their retirement and children’s education. We believe that Americans should consider voting for the economic wallet, for their IRA, their 401(k), their 403(b) plan and their kids’ 529 plan as well.

In addition to voters, presidential candidates and their advisers may benefit from the book’s “Presidential Rules for Economic Success (PRES Rules),” which the authors developed from the policies of the more successful of the 13 presidents.


Akin Headed Under the Bus, But GOP Damaged Anyway

I will be surprised if GOP MO Senate nominee Todd Akin doesn’t take a glorious swan dive under the bus today ‘for the good of the party,’ since he stands to lose $10 mill in NRSC and Rove bucks if he stays. Even if he survives the day, it’s only a matter of time before he quits.
In terms of the Senate race, credit Senator Claire McCaskill with brilliant strategy for pushing for Akin as her opponent. Boy, was she right. Unfortunately, she also had bad luck, with Akin delivering the mega-gaffe before he was out of the gate. We Dems always seem to get these breaks too early, and the Republican disasters are forgotten by the time election day rolls around. Just once, could we have a monumental GOP gaffe during the week before a general election?
Many Dems are no doubt disappointed, since Akin is a near perfect stalking horse for outing, not only the idiocy of the wingnuts, but also the ever-waffling views of Ryan and Romney about just which women should be allowed to control their own bodies without fear of criminal prosecution. One day it’s only those whose lives are endangered by pregnancy complications. On other days it’s nobody or only those who can prove “forcible” rape.
In terms of national politics, however, the good news is that Dems have lots of new footage for ads portraying the GOP as the party of prevarication and equivocation, as well as for winning support of remaining women swing voters. It’s a little harder today for thoughtful voters of either gender to see the Republican party as a sober alternative up and down-ballot. As Ed Kilgore ably puts it at the Washington Monthly,

What’s basically happened thanks to Akin is that the messy logic and morality of anti-choice GOPers and their rationalizations for positions that don’t sound politically toxic is under the microscope. From that point of view, even if Paul Ryan’s managed to reposition himself as more “moderate,” the whole ticket and the political party supporting it may find its troubles have just begun.

If there is good news for McCaskill in Akin’s too-early flop, it’s that it’s possible that just enough wingnuts will be disgusted by sacrificing the primary winner on the altar of the Romney campaign that they will stay home or lodge a protest vote on election day. It’s also possible that some moderate Missouri Republican voters will look at the Akin mess as symptomatic of their party’s confusion and decide that McCaskill is the more prudent choice. Hey Missourians, what would Harry Truman think?
It was fun this morning to watch MSNBC’s Morning Joe‘s host, Joe Scarborough straining to put lipstick on this particular pig. Something about how swell it is that the national Republicans are united in wanting to throw their MO Senate candidate under the bus, train, plane and any cars that may be milling about — in the senate race that was supposed to be their best chance for a pick-up. Yes, Republicans, let’s do have more of this.


Ryan’s ‘Regular Guy’ Kabuki Invites Ridicule

Laura Clawson has a barbed riff on Paul Ryan’s ‘voice of the common man’ pretensions up at Alternet. Here’s a taste:

Only with Mitt Romney as the presidential nominee could you have a ticket in which a guy who was elected to Congress at 28 after working on the Hill for several years was tapped to play the role of the Everyman Who Understands You Commoners.

Clawson then quotes from a recent Ryan speech in which he gibbers on about his “flippin’ burgers at McDonald’s” and “…standing in front of that big Hobart machine washing dishes or waiting tables,” and then waxes all Ayn Randy about “I’m the American dream on a path and journey so that I can find happiness however I can find it myself,” whatever that means.
To which Clawson adds,

That is some optimistic, forward-looking, Grade-A American Dream bullshit right there. Because again, Paul Ryan’s stints at service work came between high school and the year or two immediately out of college, and in that year or two immediately out of college, he was already working on the Hill…But one thing he definitely didn’t learn from low-wage work was what it’s like to face a lifetime of low-wage work, what it’s like to try to build a life and support a family while working at McDonald’s. Ryan was already trying his damnedest to injure the people living those lives by raising their taxes and shredding the safety net. Now he’s adding insult to that injury, insulting his audiences and the people struggling to get by–to pay all their bills and raise their kids, with no marketing job or House seat on the horizon–by pretending he knows any of that.

Ryan is apparently clueless that his ‘regular guy’ proclamations invite ridicule, though soon to be overshadowed by Romney’s reported image makeover for the Tampa convention.


Political Strategy Notes

Michael Tomasky puts the Todd Akin gaffe on ‘legitimate rape’ into perspective at The Daily Beast (quoting also from Garance Franke-Ruta of the Atlantic), noting that it’s not just an isolated slip-of-the-tongue; the GOP has a disturbing history with the notion. Sarah Kliff of Ezra Klein’s Wonkblog has more on the GOP’s blundering on the issue.
More evidence that the GOP is running very scared on the Akin gaffe: Sen. Scott Brown has just called on Akin to resign from the GOP MO Senate nomination.
Bill Barrow’s Associated Press article, “Solid South’ no longer just all-red or all-blue” is a good starting point for re-opening the debate about how much money, time and energy Dems should put into trying to win southern states in November, and forward from there. Barrow really needs a ‘part II’ to explore the topic in a little more depth. It’s not just about VA and NC, which Obama won in ’08. Obama ads are now running in GA, where he received 47 percent of the vote in ’08, and which is being colored pink now, instead of red or even orange in this political map.
For a data-driven analysis of state-by-state voter turnout rates in 2008, you won’t find a better source than this web page, provided by The United States Election Project .
A Suffolk University poll finds that about 40 percent of America’s eligible voters say they probably will not vote in November, according to this Fox News report. Moreover, the report notes that “55 percent of unlikely voters in the Suffolk poll have a favorable view of the president, while just a quarter look favorably on Romney…If they did vote, roughly four in 10 of those registered to vote said they would back Obama, compared with 20 percent for Mr. Romney, according to the poll last week.”
Sometimes gaffes are the truth. A top GOP official in Ohio admits to racially-driven voter-suppression, as Ari Berman reports at The Nation.
WaPo’s Carter Askew meditates on “Mitt Romney’s Entitlement Problem,” and comes up with a revealing insight: ” Romney seems to believe that in certain ways he is better than others. How dare we question his tax rate; he has paid millions and millions of dollars in taxes. He pays more in one year at 13 percent than 99.9 percent of Americans pay in their lifetimes…Maybe Romney’s sense of entitlement is so vast that he thinks taxes and charity are one in the same: both his discretionary gifts to mankind, for which we should be thankful.”
Intrade’s political forecast map is a little different than the others, but still looking very good for the President.
“Robert Reich’s “Mitt’s 13% Tax Is Shameful” from his blog, via Reader Supported News, cuts to the chase in putting Romney’s taxes in perspective. Reich shares the one quote by Adam Smith the Republicans never repeat: “The rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion.” Then Reich goes for the jugular: “At a time when poverty is increasing, when public parks and public libraries are being closed and when public schools are shrinking their offerings and their hours, when the nation’s debt is immense, and when the 400 richest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million of us put together – Romney’s 13 percent is shameful.”
Here’s the skinny on all of the states’ voter registration deadlines, with widgets to register.


Dems: here’s a really interesting result buried in this week-end’s big WaPo/Kaiser poll

Take a look at these responses to a reasonably neutral question on Medicare
33. Which of these two descriptions comes closer to your view of what Medicare should look like in the future?
OPTION A: Medicare should continue as it is today, with the government guaranteeing all seniors the same set of health insurance benefits,
All: 58%
Dems: 68%
Ind 53%
Rep. 55%
OPTION B: Medicare should be changed to a system in which the government guarantees each senior a fixed amount of money to help them purchase coverage either from traditional Medicare or from a list of private health plans?
All 36%
Dem 29%
Ind 42%
Rep. 39%
Dang, according to this, even Republicans don’t support the Ryan/Romney/Goron Gecko plan when it is stated neutrally.


Artur Davis and Other Democratic Apostates: A Brief Taxonomy

This item is crossposted from The New Republic.
For the third consecutive time, Republicans are planning to feature an aggrieved Democrat (or ex-Democrat) at their national Convention to personalize claims that the latest Democratic presidential nominee has abandoned the true legacy of his party and left moderate-to-conservative donkeys no option but to vote for the GOP.
As it happens, I know the most recent trio of apostates pretty well. 2004’s Zell Miller, who was enlisted to savage John Kerry’s national security credentials, was my boss in Georgia back in the early 1990s. And I worked with Joe Lieberman (2008’s cross-endorser) and Artur Davis (the latest model) when both men were active in the now-defunct Democratic Leadership Council, where I was policy director for a good while. So what if anything do they have in common? Is there a template for party-switchers?
If there is, it might well be a combination of these three men’s qualities. Miller is the full convert, who changed his positions on a host of issues to reflect conservative ideology even before endorsing George W. Bush (and subsequently, a long line of other Republican candidates in Georgia and elsewhere). Miller is also, as anyone who knows him will agree, one of the least neutral people in American politics, a true Appalachian character in the mold of Andrew Johnson who is capable of rolling around in an eye-gouging fight in one ditch and then the other with equal passion.
Lieberman, like his predecessor the neocon “Reagan Democrat” Jeane Kilpatrick (the star of the 1984 Republican Convention) is someone who strayed far outside the boundaries of his party on one set of issues–national security. After being denied renomination to the Senate as a Democrat in 2006, he had few qualms about endorsing his old friend and comrade-in-arms John McCain, even though McCain had by 2008 been forced to renounce most of the domestic policy projects on which he and Lieberman had worked together. In effect, Lieberman was endorsing the man who was briefly discussed as a cross-party running-mate for John Kerry–and getting revenge on his many Democratic enemies.
Davis is a different matter. A very early supporter and personal friend of Barack Obama, and once (despite a pro-business and socially conservative record that discomfited some national Democrats) a passionate advocate of universal health coverage and stronger federal support for public education, Davis set his sites on the audacious goal of becoming governor of Alabama (as he told me years earlier, just after giving an inspiring speech on how conservatives were starving the public schools and the economic opportunities of his very poor majority-black district). Having done so, he systematically began adjusting his ideology to the views of his state’s conservative general electorate, to the point of becoming a national spokesman against the Affordable Care Act and a voice of open contempt towards Alabama’s embattled pro-Democratic interest groups, presumably believing his race and the radicalism of Alabama’s GOP would maintain his base of support.
His extreme “triangulation” didn’t work, and he was absolutely trounced in the 2010 Democratic gubernatorial primary by an underfunded white candidate who swept Davis’ own majority-black congressional district. Practically from the moment of his concession speech, he left his party and his state behind, and soon surfaced as a columnist for National Review and then a transplanted Virginian expressing interest in a future congressional race as a Republican. The one-time champion of better-funded public education recently emerged as a vocal defender of Gov. Bobby Jindal’s radical Christian-Right-based school voucher program in Louisiana.
Davis has none of Miller’s fire, and little of Lieberman’s desire to maintain an independent position outside both parties. His current posture has all the trappings of a professional “reboot,” and his invitation to go to Tampa and shiv his old friend the President of the United States must look to him like a heaven-sent opportunity to become a national celebrity and leapfrog the many prospective congressional candidates in his new digs who never had a “D” next to their names on any ballot.
I say this not to accuse Artur Davis of insincerity. He took on a nearly impossible task in running for governor in the most pro-Republican year in the state’s history, and he did have the decency to get out of Alabama before switching parties, lest he give aid and comfort to the neo-confederates who dominate the GOP in the Heart of Dixie. But his claim that it’s Obama, not himself, who changed since 2008 is disingenuous, and he will obviously be used by his new friends to provide cover for the Romney/Ryan ticket’s heavily race-inflected attacks on the president on the entirely phony grounds that he’s gutting welfare work requirements and “raiding” Medicare to redistribute tax dollars to poor and minority people–you know, Artur Davis’ former constituents.
It’s interesting that Democrats don’t seem to feel the same need to recruit a high-profile apostate from the GOP ranks every four years. But whether it’s giving Zell Miller a chance to vent his perpetually swollen spleen, or offering Joe Lieberman the consolation prize of a convention speech after party conservative vetoed him as a running-mate for McCain, or giving Artur Davis a new political lease on life after he fell between two stools in Alabama–Republicans always keep the door open to anyone who can reinforce their deeply discredited reputation as a “centrist” party that’s a reasonable choice for disgruntled Democrats. If Bill Clinton were willing to play the role assigned to him in Romney attack ads as the champion of a “New Democrat” tradition Obama has abandoned, they’d give the Big Dog a Convention role as well. But that obviously ain’t happening, so they’ll take what they can get.


A Working America Message From The Field: On Jobs and Taxes, It’s About Fairness

The following is cross-posted from an e-blast from workingamerica.org:
It Just Makes Sense: Bring Jobs Home
We can connect jobs and tax fairness thanks to introduction of the Bring Jobs Home Act–and the Republican filibuster that blocked it.
Our members understand the basic unfairness of tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas. For them, outsourcing is a critical and emotional issue.

· People appreciate a realistic, nuanced conversation. In Pennsylvania, we’re finding that 4 to 5 people each night ask if we think outsourcing can really be addressed. For people who are skeptical, it’s really helpful to describe the Bring Jobs Home Act as “a step in the right direction” rather than a simple, perfect solution.
· Many people are surprised and angry that their Senators wouldn’t vote for the Bring Jobs Home Act. One Wisconsin member described it as “a no-brainer.”
· When we note that there are tax incentives to ship jobs overseas today, and that the bill would use our tax dollars to keep jobs here instead, that gets a positive response, and the personal connection of the issue to their lives help distinguish our conversation from the usual platitudes of a political campaign.
· Retirees are identifying good jobs as a top issue because they’re worried about their children and grandchildren, because the kind of stable, secure jobs that supported them are harder than ever to find. They respond strongly to the issue of outsourcing–often with stories of people in their family having trouble finding work.

People connect to this issue on a gut level

· Stephanie, a member in High Point, N.C., explained that she worked for a credit card company call center, where employees started getting sent to other locations–even as far away as New Delhi–to run trainings. “The company executives marketed this training opportunity as a vacation,” Stephanie told us. “But they were really training their replacements. Soon after, the Greensboro call center was closed down…companies outsource jobs for cheaper labor.” Stephanie felt betrayed–angry, frustrated and demoralized over the loss of her job and the disrespect from her employer.
· Another new member in Sheboygan, Wisconsin said that, while he has worked at the same factory for 15 years, he’s seen three co-workers’ jobs get outsourced in the last year. “He worries every day that he’ll be next,” our organizer Michelle said.
· Two separate members in Beaver County, Pennsylvania brought up the example of a local steel mill bought and dismantled by an out-of-state company. Interestingly, both independently compared that mill closure to Bain Capital.

Ending the Bush Tax Cuts for the Richest

The idea that the richest 2 percent should pay their fair share is resonating, as well. We find very wide agreement with ending the Bush tax cuts for the richest.
· We’ve had success pulling together the Bush tax cuts and the Bring Jobs Home Act as part of a single message about tax fairness. People agree that corporations and the richest 2 percent aren’t paying their fair share, and working people are suffering the consequences.
· A small handful of people–a few people each night–disagree with the idea of ending the Bush tax cuts on the richest 2 percent, usually using some variation of the “job creator” \talking point.
· The most effective response to this is to point out the CEOs of big corporations like Verizon and GE aren’t paying their fair share in taxes and aren’t creating jobs.

“If it wasn’t for the middle class, the economy wouldn’t work,” is very effective language when making the case for ending the top-level Bush tax cuts.
Karen Nussbaum, Executive Director
Working America


Kilgore: On Mitt’s Taxes, 13% of What?

Ed Kilgore’s “Mitt Digs in Deeper” at the Washington Monthly asks a good question about Romney’s declaration that he hasn’t paid less than 13 percent of his income in taxes:

I mean, 13% is not a high rate for a guy with Mitt’s wealth; certainly nothing approaching the allegedly confiscatory rates the poor job-creators of America are toiling under, making them wonder each and every day if it’s time to Go Gault. And the number raises the rather obvious question: 13% of what? Total income? Adjusted Gross Income? Taxable income? Ezra Klein suggests it may be that last measurement, which may be the only one under which he can claim a double-digit tax burden.

It’s a curiously inept media strategy. As Kilgore adds, Romney would probably be better off with a “none of your damn business” approach. Instead, “his drip-drip-drip of undocumented assertions raises a lot more questions than it answers.”
President Obama and Vice President Biden have released 12 and 14 years, respectively, of their tax forms. Romney can evade and jabber all he wants. But smart voters won’t be satisfied until he shows an equal commitment to openness and transparency.