washington, dc

The Democratic Strategist

Political Strategy for a Permanent Democratic Majority

J.P. Green

Political Strategy Notes

GOP strategist Ed Rogers worries at WaPo that Democrats could well benefit from stock market and oil booms, and be sitting pretty come next November.
Elizabeth Warren says she is not running for president, and The Fix’s Sean Sullivan explains some of the reasons why.
…And Esquire’s Charles Pierce channels a little Gore Vidal to explain (via Reader Supported News) why that’s a good thing.
At Real Clear Politics, Sean Trende analyzes “Democrats’ 2013 Drop-Off Problem” and what it might mean for 2014. “What does this mean for 2014? Possibly nothing. There is a lot of football left to be played, the president’s job approval rating could rally significantly, the Democrats could become enthused, and drop-off could become a non-issue…But if that doesn’t happen, Democrats have a real headache coming on. Let’s assume they can expect a drop-off of four to five points from Obama’s 2012 performance, all other things being equal. Twenty-eight House Democrats occupy seats where Obama won less than 55 percent of the vote…”
Kyle Kondik notes at Sabato’s CrystalBall that “Late filing deadlines give Republicans a chance to find better candidates in places where they’re lacking.” Same is true for Dems, however.
A new poll of 2,089 18- to 29-year-olds, which was conducted online by GfK between Oct. 30 and Nov. 11 by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics suggests Dems need a better Obamacare pitch to young voters. As Sheryl Gay Stolberg reports at the News York Times, “A solid majority, 56 percent, disapproved of the law when it was called the Affordable Care Act. Just 17 percent said the measure would improve the quality of health care; 78 percent said quality would either stay the same or get worse. Half said the law would increase costs, while 46 percent said costs would decrease or stay the same.”
Be that as it may, Tracy Seiple reports at the San Jose Mercury-News that “The startling finding by the Public Policy Institute of California says that young and healthy people are overwhelmingly more likely to seek health insurance than older and sicker people…The PPIC numbers on young people who plan on signing up for insurance appear to mimic an early analysis by Covered California, the state’s online health exchange, that trumpeted its first-month enrollment figure of 30,830 people, including 6,900 who are between 18 and 34.”
Mark Blumenthal and Ariel Edwards-Levy point out at HuffPollster: “In a CNN poll released in November, opinion on the health care bill was split among those aged 18 to 34, with 48 percent supporting the law, 33 percent opposing it because it was too liberal, and 12 percent because it was not liberal enough. Younger Americans were also more optimistic on the law’s prospects. Just 25 percent in that age group called the law a failure, compared with 40 percent or more in older age groups. Seventy-one percent said the law’s problems would be solved, while 50 percent or fewer of older Americans predicted they would.”
One of the most potentially-powerful, but most underutilized message points Dems could use more aggressively to mobilize young voters against the GOP is conservatives’ unflagging assault on the environment, nicely documented in “ALEC calls for penalties on ‘freerider’ homeowners in assault on clean energy” by The Guardian’s Suzanne Goldenberg and Ed Pilkington.


Women Candidates and Voters Central to Dem Hopes for 2014

The National Journal’s Shane Goldmacher asks an important question about the 2014 elections, “Can Democrats Still Win With a Women-Centered Strategy?” Subtitled “Democrats want 2014 to be a Year of the Woman (and women’s issues), betting that the GOP’s 2012 gender gap holds for another cycle,” Goldmacher’s post adds some clarity to the discussion about Democratic grand strategy for the 2014 campaign.
Democrats are appropriately nervous about the relatively low non-presidential year turnout of their key constituencies and the correspondingly high voting percentages of the more pro-GOP demographic groups. Historical patterns are hard to deny, and it’s an uphill argument to counter that 2014 will somehow be different. Yet some unusual trends emerged during the last year, including rock-bottom approval ratings for the GOP, which includes a sharp downturn among senior voters, who tend to lead off-year turnout percentages.
Then there is the GOP shutdown wild card, which many believe will be largely forgotten a year from now. But Democrats might pick up a small number of seats with some well-targeted reminders, and the explosive growth of Latino voters should also help contain the Republicans’ expected gains. Dems hope, further, that gridlock fatigue and an economic uptick in the coming months will also give them enough of an edge to hold the senate and cut deep into the GOP majority in the House.
Many believe, however, that the Republicans’ rapidly declining support among women could be the pivotal factor next November. As Goldmacher notes,

The Democratic Party is hoping 2014 will be a Year of the Woman–again…As party operatives prepare for the 2014 midterm elections, Democratic women are being cast in starring roles, on the ballot and at the ballot box, as the party tries to take back politically important governor’s mansions and keep its fragile majority in the Senate.
“The importance of women to the Democratic Party in 2014 cannot be overstated,” said Jess McIntosh, a spokeswoman for EMILY’s List, which recruits and supports Democratic women candidates. “They are running in our biggest, most important races in the country.”

Goldmacher notes that Democrats are fielding some strong women candidates in high-profile state-wide races in 2014, including Wendy Davis (TX Gov.) Alison Lundergan Grimes (KY Senate), Mary Burke (WI Gov.), Allyson Schwartz (PA Gov), Michelle Nunn (GA Senate) and Natalie Tennant (WV Senate). Democratic strategists “believe the slate of prominent women on the 2014 ballot will make the contrast with Republicans all the clearer ,” says Goldmacher.
He warns, however, that Democratic U.S. Senators Landrieu and Hagan hold two of the most endangered seats being heavily-targeted by Republicans, and GA, WV and KY remain tough states for Democratic candidates. The GOP is fielding some women candidates as well, but most of them seem lackluster in comparison to Democratic women candidates, like Wendy Davis. Further, ads Goldmacher,

The recent victory of Democrat Terry McAuliffe in the Virginia governor’s race showed that issues of abortion and contraception remain salient. McAuliffe bombarded the airwaves on those topics en route to running up his margin of victory among unmarried women voters to 42 percentage points, according to exit polling.
“It’s a deep problem for the Republicans,” said Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America.
The Supreme Court’s announcement last week that it will take up a case about whether employers may refuse to provide contraceptive coverage means that the volatile issue of birth control again will be injected in the midst of the 2014 campaign. The case will be decided in the middle of next year.
Democrats have made plain that the “war on women” playbook will be key to their efforts to unseat McConnell. Last week, Grimes rolled out the endorsement of Lilly Ledbetter, the namesake of the pay-equity law signed by Obama, and her campaign issued a memo on women’s issues, noting that Grimes is an “advocate for women” and would be “Kentucky’s first female United States senator.”

While reproductive rights are key concerns of women in general and unmarried women in particular, women candidates are addressing the full range of socio-economic concerns that influence swing voters, including men. “There are lots of reasons women make great candidates,” [Democratic pollster Anna] Greenberg said. “It’s not because they can just talk about abortion.”
Goldmacher notes that “men also can appeal to women voters on traditionally women’s issues,” and adds:

…McAuliffe is the latest example. Anna Greenberg…noted that television ads about abortion, birth-control access or defunding Planned Parenthood aired in nearly every competitive congressional race last cycle, whether the contest featured a Democratic women against a Republican man, or vice versa.

While some pundits have noted that the gender gap is racial in that most white women voters have voted for Republicans in recent elections, the percentage is still significantly less than for white men. And McAuliffe’s stunning margin of victory among unmarried women in a bellwether state also underscores the wisdom of Democrats recruiting more women candidates and male candidates who can address issues of concern to women voters in a positive way.
At present 10 percent of Republican House and Senate members are women, compared to 25 percent of all Democratic members of both houses, according to the congressional record. In 2012, “Of the more than 1700 women serving in state legislatures, roughly 60 percent are members of the Democratic Party,” reports the Center for American Women and Politics.
In the last non-presidential election year, 2010, the gender gap favoring Democratic candidates was “more widespread in this election than in any other,” said Susan J. Carroll, a senior scholar at the Center for American Women and Politics. “Typically, we see gender gaps in about two-thirds of all statewide races. This year we saw gender gaps in all but a couple of contests,” despite significant Republican gains nationwide. With respect to House races, 49% of women compared with 42% of men voted for Democratic candidates in their districts.


Political Strategy Notes

According to “Obamacare Impact on Virginia Vote Steers Strategy in 2014” by Bloomberg’s Julie Hirschfeld Davis & John McCormick, quoting McAuliffe pollster Geoff Garin: “Cuccinelli’s focus on the health-care measure had “actually been counterproductive,” even with voters who disapproved of the law. It solidified their view that he was an ideological candidate with a national agenda that had nothing to do with Virginia, said Garin.”
Craig Harrington and Albert Kleine explore how “How Print And Broadcast Media Are Hiding Obamacare’s Success In Controlling Costs.”
At The Atlantic Richard Florida explains why “The Suburbs Are the New Swing States.As Florida puts it, “…The key political footballs – the new “swing states,” so to speak – are the swelling ranks of economically distressed suburbs, where poverty has been growing and where the economic crisis hit especially hard. There are now more poor people living in America’s suburbs than its center cities, and as a recent Brookings Institution report found, both Republican and Democratic districts have been affected by this reality.”
Salon.com’s Micheal Lind discusses “How to beat libertarians on the economy: While the right is united economically behind one main agenda, the left lacks such a consensus. Here’s the solution.”
Zachary A. Goldfarb reports at Washington Post Politics on why “More liberal, populist movement emerging in Democratic Party ahead of 2016 elections.” Says Goldfarb, “The arena where the populist push is likely to play out most clearly is in the nascent 2016 presidential campaign. [Sen. Elizabeth} Warren is the object of admiration among liberals, drawing huge audiences for her speeches. She has said she doesn’t plan to run for president, but she hasn’t made a firm commitment to stay out of the race…”
Kelly S. Kennedy writes at the Tucson Citizen that “States’ numbers will likely tell HealthCare.gov’s story” better than the federal exchange website. “There are a lot more resources available in the states that are doing their own exchange,” [Urban Institute Fellow Stan] Dorn said. Those states received federal funds to market their exchanges…And, he said, it’s easier for one state to handle marketing, technology and enrollment for just one exchange than it is for the federal government to manage all of those issues for the 35 states that chose not to create state-based exchanges.”
At The New York Times, Jeremy W. Peters reports that “Abortion Cases in Court Helped Tilt Democrats Against the Filibuster.” As Peters explains, “Very quickly and unexpectedly, abortion and contraceptive rights became the decisive factor in the filibuster fight. First there were the two coincidentally timed decisions out of Texas and Washington. Then momentum to change the rules reached a critical mass when Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California and a defender of abortion rights, decided to put aside her misgivings, in large part because the recent court action was so alarming to her, Democrats said.”
At The Plumline, Ryan Cooper explains why “Dems should not hesitate to further streamline the Senate rulebook,” and punctuates his argument with a simple point: “if Republicans continue to use procedural tricks to block the nomination process. Republicans will not be so generous when the tables are turned.”
Obama’s field director Jeremy Bird has a TNR post discussing how Dems can improve turnout, noting that “We Can’t Just Play Defense on Voting Access. It’s Time to Make Voting Easier.”


Challenge for Dems: How to Prevent Further GOP/NRA Recall Wins

At Daily Kos, David Nir spotlights a tough strategic challenge facing Democrats: GOP/NRA successes in recalling Democratic state legislators. Here’s Nir on the most recent incident in Colorado:

… In the face of a likely recall election, Democratic state Sen. Evie Hudak has opted to resign, a move that short-circuits the recall effort. A Hudak loss would have handed control of the Senate to Republicans, who are now just one seat shy of the majority following two successful recalls of other Democratic lawmakers earlier this year. Now, however, the recall won’t take place, and Democrats will be able to appoint a replacement (though that person will have to seek re-election in 2014, whereas Hudak would have served until 2016).
Hudak’s decision, while highly unusual, isn’t actually that surprising, and we discussed this very possibility when news of a new recall drive first emerged. Hudak’s seat is only light blue, and she won both of her prior races by very narrow margins, plus she was also term-limited. Given the ugly dropoff in Democratic turnout in the prior recalls, she’d have been looking at steep odds. Instead, she decided to truly take one for the team…But while Democrats will retain their majority, the gun activists who have forced and threatened all of these recalls can claim another victim….

Nir adds that there are many more vulnerable seats held by Dems in state legislatures, though it remains an open question, whether the Colorado recall template will work in less NRA-friendly purple districts. Nir concludes with a challenging question for Dems regarding 2014:

…This falloff in Democratic performance in non-presidential races is a deeply disturbing phenomenon, given that it’s now gone so far as to turn lawmakers out of office without even conducting an election! Who out there is working on fixing this?

There are lots of strategic possibilities worth discussing in answering the question, including more assertive opposition to the NRA, which functions a tool of the GOP and putting more resources into off-year turnout mobilization. Dems must also focus on getting a bigger share of the pivotal senior vote in non-presidential years, especially since polls indicate that they are turning off to the GOP.
Nir notes elsewhere that at least one Republican has voiced concern that the recall strategy could backfire, as it did on Dems in Wisconsin. That may be a concern. But so far the GOP has succeeded in dumping three Dem legislators in CO.
Control of the state legislatures has been key to GOP gerrymandering in recent years. It’s hard enough to get Democrats elected in swing districts. But now Dems must formulate a workable strategy to defeat GOP/NRA recall campaigns.


Political Strategy Notes

At Talking Points Memo, TDS managing editor Ed Kilgore’s “It’s The Fundamentals, Stupid: Elections Aren’t Determined By Short-Term ‘Game Changes’” puts some needed perspective on all of the jockeying for ’14 and ’16: “…a lot of the breathless and widely gyrating prognosticating we’ve been hearing lately really revolves around whether a lame-duck president is dealing with a Republican Senate or with a Democratic Senate in which Republicans hold an effective veto power via the filibuster (barring a full “nuking” of minority obstruction by Democrats, which remains highly unlikely). And as for the 2016 presidential contest, you’d be better advised to watch those boring “fundamentals” for clues to the outcome than any short-term changes in a game that has barely even begun. You know: fundamentals like the economy, and what the Affordable Care Act looks like this time two years from now.”
Matthew O’Brien’s post, “The Singular Waste of America’s Healthcare System in 1 Remarkable Chart” at The Atlantic has a good graphic to show people who are undecided about the need for health care reform how inefficient the current U.S. system is, compared to other health care systems in developed nations.
You go to YouTube and type “Obamacare ads” in the search window, and you get about 98K hits. My quickie scan suggests that 90 percent of them are negative, thanks most likely to the Koch brothers and other hidden funding sources. Obamacare supporters need more and better ads, which ought to be doable, considering all of the people who have benefitted by the ACA.
In similar vein, Media Matters for America’s “How The GOP Uses Network News To Discredit Obama” by Tyler Hansen, Olivia Marshall and Samantha Wyatt provides an instructive read for Democratic media strategists.
Esquire’s political ace Charles Pierce has another great post, this one on “The Nuclear Fallout” (via Reader Supported News), which notes “There are no moderate Republicans any more. There is no bipartisan solution because one party is not interested in governing the country if the people are silly enough to vote for a president that party doesn’t like. (This, it should be said, is something that the newly feisty Harry Reid should explain to “moderate” Democrats like Joe Manchin and Mark Pryor, of whom it already is being said will hold the “balance of power” in the new Senate order. You will do what the leadership tells you on the big-ticket items — which include judges — or you will find out what life is like on the Post Office Commitee.) In almost every poll, the American public is crying out for solutions, and most of them are solutions supported by this president and by the Democratic majority in the Senate. This is what the Republicans determined to block. Now, it’s harder for them to do it. If they don’t act to wring the crazy out of their party, then the president and his party should use every legal means available to do it for them. It’s time for constituent services in the districts that elect the crazy people to suddenly feel the pinch of reduced resources. It’s time to get very tough on voting rights.”
In his excellent msnbc.com round-up, “With eye on 2014, GOP ramps up war on voting,” Zachary Roth observes that “In the 10 months since President Obama created a bipartisan panel to address voting difficulties, 90 restrictive voting bills have been introduced in 33 states. So far, nine have become law, according to a recent comprehensive roundup by the Brennan Center for Justice – but others are moving quickly through statehouses.”
Conservative columnist Diana West argues that Republicans should ignore distractions like the gender gap and focus on turning out their strongest demographic, married, middle income voters. West crunches numbers in the recent Virginia elections and 2012 and concludes, “In other words, middle-income and married Americans are Republican strongholds. Eureka! Here is where Republicans can find winning margins by turning out more of these traditional voters — as many as humanly possible.” If Dems can keep up their current fund-raising edge, perhaps their best tactic to bust this GOP strategy is to buy up ad time/space on media popular with this demographic.
Nonetheless, Hotline on Call’s Alex Roarty’s “Why Democrats Are Accusing Mitch McConnell of Sexism” has Dems anchoring their Kentucky strategy for taking Mitch McConnel’s seat to his opposition to the Violence Against Women Act.
The Michigan Republican Party will launch its new African American Engagement Office in Detroit on December 6 to improve on the two percent of the vote their presidential nominee received in the city in 2012. Sen. Rand Paul, critic of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the 50th anniversary of which which will be feted extensively over the next year) and son of a U.S. congressmen who has allowed overt racism in his newsletter, will reportedly headline the grand opening. What could go wrong?


Reflections on JFK’s Legacy

The assassination of President Kennedy had a transformational effect on the nation and world, even more so for those of us who lived in Washington, D.C. at the time. In 1963 the nation’s capitol was always abuzz about all things Kennedy. JFK brought charm, sparkle and unbridled optimism to what was otherwise a sleepy southern city, more accustomed to the yawner days of the Eisenhower Administration, along with some dark, lingering vestiges of McCarthyism.
On top of all that, my Dad, who was born the same year as President Kennedy, was a fierce JFK defender from the get-go. Anyone who uttered the slightest criticism of our president (or FDR) was quickly lambasted as an idiot. He, along with most of our neighbors seemed shattered by the assassination, and even as a 16-year old, I could feel the city’s palpable anxiety about what would happen now. What was going to happen to that youthful spirit, the call to service and the sense of great possibilities that JFK embodied? No one seemed to know.
You didn’t sense any fear that the country was going to collapse – LBJ’s take-charge persona seemed to preclude any immanent disaster. But there was a feeling that the hopeful and optimistic spirit we had come to take for granted was suddenly gone, and it completely evaporated rather quickly. For my generation, the downer was somewhat softened by mid-sixties cultural excitement the Beatles generated, but the political atmosphere was nonetheless darkened.


Political Strategy Notes

You’ve heard it before. But David Welna’s npr.org post “With Nominees Stalled, Democrats Reprise Filibuster Threat” notes signs that Dems maybe ready to rumble: “Democrats say that this time, they’re ready to pull the trigger on what’s known as “the nuclear option.” Doing so would amount to altering the rules not with the traditional two-thirds majority but a simple majority of 51…Several other senior Democrats have also come around to embracing such a rules change, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California….”I think we need to change the rules,” Feinstein said. “Now, Republicans say, ‘What goes around comes around. Wait ’til we’re in charge.’ I can’t wait until they’re in charge. I mean, the moment is now. We’re here for now.”
At Think Progress John Halpin reveals “Here’s Why The ‘White Vote’ Is A Myth.” Reviewing a recent study by the Center for American Progress and Policylink, Halpin notes, “A huge divide between whites is one of the most important: while 58 percent of white liberals believe that we must work together on common challenges, 59 percent of white conservatives said that people are basically on their own (overall, 36 percent of white respondents self-identified as ‘liberal’ and 50 percent of whites as ‘conservative’)…By contrast, majorities of African-Americans and Latinos — regardless of ideological self-identification — hold a more collective understanding of the economy. 73 percent of African-American liberals and 60 percent of African-American conservatives believe that we must work together on common economic challenges (46 percent of African-Americas self-identify as ‘liberal’ and 38 percent as ‘conservative’). Fifty-six percent of Latino liberals and 53 percent of Latino conservatives believe similarly (45 percent of Latinos self-identify as ‘liberal’ and 43 percent as ‘conservative’). Asian responses on this particular question more closely resemble those of whites than other people of color.”
Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson explains why “Voter suppression the new GOP strategy“: “Voter suppression has become the linchpin of Republican strategy. After Mitt Romney’s defeat in 2012, the GOP was briefly abuzz with talk of expanding the party’s appeal to young and Latino voters. Instead, the party doubled down on its opposition to immigration reform and its support for cultural conservatism — positions tantamount to electoral suicide unless the youth and minority vote can be suppressed. Meyerson shares what is known about the huge amounts of money Republicans are investing in buying elections, although most of their contributions are shrouded in secrecy. He conclude, “If you want to vote in the Republicans’ America, remember to bring your birth certificate. But if you want to buy an election and stay under wraps, your secret is safe with them.”
Robert Higgs reports at ohio.com that “In a party-line vote, the Ohio Senate on Wednesday approved a bill to shorten early voting to eliminate the so-called “Golden Week” that allowed people to both register to vote and cast early in-person absentee ballots at the same time…The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 20-13. The 20 yes votes all came from Republicans. The no votes all came from Democrats. The bill now moves to the House.”
At Maddowblog Steve Benen explains “ACA slows growth in health costs.” Says Benen “How good are the number figures? According to a new report published by Jason Furman, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, over the last three years – the period since “Obamacare” became the law of the land – per capita health care spending has grown at a rate of 1.3%. “This is the lowest rate on record for any three-year period and less than one-third the long-term historical average stretching back to 1965,” Furman noted.”
Joan McCarter’s “Obamacare enrollments surging, HealthCare.gov working better” at Daily Kos provides a share-worthy antidote to the GOP’s ACA spin. As McCarter points out, “enrollements across the country are surging, coming in ahead of projections in states across the country.” Further, adds McCarter, quoting from a Noam H. Levey’s L.A. Times article on the topic, “What we are seeing is incredible momentum,” said Peter Lee, director of Covered California, the nation’s largest state insurance marketplace, which accounted for a third of all enrollments nationally in October. California–which enrolled about 31,000 people in health plans last month–nearly doubled that in the first two weeks of this month…Several other states, including Connecticut and Kentucky, are outpacing their enrollment estimates, even as states that depend on the federal website lag far behind. In Minnesota, enrollment in the second half of October ran at triple the rate of the first half, officials said. Washington state is also on track to easily exceed its October enrollment figure, officials said.”
In a similar vein, read Paul Waldman’s American Prospect post, “Obamacare Panic to Enter Even Stupider New Phase,” which notes “January 1 is the end of any talk of repeal, and Republicans know it–as many of them have been saying all along, once you start giving people benefits, it’s all but impossible to take them away. That doesn’t mean there isn’t still work to do, and it doesn’t mean there aren’t things that could go wrong. Nor does it mean there might not be piecemeal fixes to one or another provision debated in the future; there almost certainly will be. But unless you think that in the next six weeks Republicans are going to manage to put together a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress to repeal the ACA–something you’d have to be nuts to believe–it’s never going to happen.”
Ditto, says Krugman.
Enjoy, mateys, the headline above this video: “NBC News Pollsters ‘Shocked’ By Horrible Numbers For GOP“:


Brownstein: ACA Repeal Still a Bad Idea to Majority of Voters

The meme-mongers of the Republican’s mighty message machine are not going to like Ronald Brownstein’s National Journal article “Poll: Most Americans Oppose Obamacare Repeal Despite Rollout Troubles,” which reviews the findings of a new United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. As Brownstein explains:

Despite sharp divisions over the long-term impact of President Obama’s health-reform law, fewer than two in five Americans say it should be repealed, virtually unchanged since last summer, the latest United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll has found.
Amid all the tumult over the law’s troubled implementation, the survey found that public opinion about it largely follows familiar political tracks and has changed remarkably little since the summer on the critical question of what Congress should do next. On that measure, support for repeal has not significantly increased among any major group except Republicans and working-class whites since the Congressional Connection Poll last tested opinion on the question in July.

Brownstein goes on to note that major Democratic constituencies remain supportive of the legislation, and “Congressional Democrats inclined to distance themselves from the law in the hope of placating skeptical independent or Republican-leaning voters face the risk of alienating some of their core supporters.” He adds that “A slim 52 percent majority agreed with the negative assessment: “The law is fundamentally flawed and will do more to hurt the nation’s health care system than improve it,” while “…46 percent endorsed the more positive sentiment: “The law is experiencing temporary problems and will ultimately produce a better health care system for the country.”
In terms of demographic breakdown, Brownstein explains:

Since last July’s poll, support for repeal has oscillated only slightly (or not at all) for self-identified Democrats (9 percent now, unchanged since July) and independents (40 percent now compared with 41 percent then); whites (48 percent versus 44 percent) and nonwhites (unchanged at 16 percent); young adults under 30 (unchanged at 26 percent) and seniors (42 percent now versus 40 percent then). The survey recorded a somewhat bigger shift toward repeal among whites without a college degree (up to 53 percent from 46 percent last summer) and self-identified Republicans (74 percent now, from 65 percent last summer). But whites with at least a four-year college degree remained essentially unchanged, with 36 percent now backing repeal, compared with 39 percent in July.
Indeed, like the question over the law’s eventual impact, this measure found clear signs of doubt among the key elements of the modern Democratic coalition, but no indication that they are rushing to abandon health reform: Repeal drew support from just one-sixth of minorities, one-fourth of millennials, and one-third of college-educated white women, the groups on which Democrats now rely most.

You wouldn’t know it from the major TV networks’ uncritical parroting of the GOP’s message du jour, but not much has changed since the rollout in terms of the constituency for repealing the ACA. Most American voters opposed Obamacare repeal during the summer, and they still feel that way today — which is interesting, considering that the Republicans have thrown everything they have at this law, including the rollout glitches.


Political Strategy Notes

In his MSNBC.com report “Wisconsin GOP aims to scrap weekend voting,” Zachary Roth explains “The measure, which passed the state assembly Thursday, would give municipalities two choices for early voting, known in the state as in-person absentee voting: they could offer it either from 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays in the two weeks before an election; or at any time on a weekday, but not to exceed 30 hours per week, again in the two weeks before an election…That would mean a reduction in early voting hours for the state’s two biggest cities, Milwaukee and Madison–which are also its most important Democratic strongholds…Scrapping weekend voting will hit African-Americans particularly hard, Rev. Willie Brisco, who leads an alliance of Milwaukee churches, told msnbc…”A lot of people in our community are working two or three jobs, odd hours, having difficulty with childcare,” said Brisco. “So the weekend and the early voting reaches a lot of those people.”
Further evidence that the Republicans are getting increasingly brazen about voter suppression from Richard L. Hasen’s New York Times op-ed “Voter Suppression’s New Pretext“: “Says Texas: “It is perfectly constitutional for a Republican-controlled legislature to make partisan districting decisions, even if there are incidental effects on minority voters who support Democratic candidates.”
At The American Prospect Paul Waldman’s article title and subtitle puts the Obamacare nailbiting in a more sober perspoective: “Memo to Democratic Chicken Littles: The Sky Is Not Falling: Yes, this is a politically difficult moment for President Obama. But everyone needs to chill out.”
Former Bushie David Frum continues to risk excommunication from his party by suggesing, gasp, reasonable compromise, as in his latest post, “Why It’s Time To Start Talking About Reforming, Not Repealing, Obamacare” at The Daily Beast.
The Upton bill that has passed the House with substantial support from Blue Dog/moderate Democrats is a step backward in terms of policy. But, despite the Obama-bashing rhetoric accompanying it, the billl may be the first indication that the “Repeal Obamacare” lunacy of the Republican Party is slowly dissolving and being replaced by a more realistic movement for “reforms.” Meanwhile former speaker Pelosi provides a good soundbite, which Obamacare defenders can use: “I wish that my Republican colleagues could see how successful the Affordable Care Act is in California,” Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said. “I wish you could hear the stories of family after family after family being liberated and freed from the constraint of being job-locked because a family has a pre-existing condition.”
This new Zogby poll has Obama’s approval numbers down 3 points. But interestingly, he is holding steady with younger voters,” despite all of the GOP Obamacare fear-mongering directed at this demographic.
at HuffPollster, Jon Ward explores “What Does Obama’s Approval Rating Mean For 2014?,” quoting Sean Trende: “[P]residential job approval is still the most important variable for how his party fares in midterm elections, explaining about half of the variance. The relationship is highly statistically significant: For every point in job approval the president loses, his party loses 0.6 percent of its caucus….As I’ve said before, this election isn’t going to be about sixth-year itches or any such electoral mumbo-jumbo. It’s going to be about presidential job approval, supplemented by the state of the economy (which also affects job approval to a degree) and how overexposed or underexposed the president’s party is. Right now, the second factor provides a drag beyond the president’s job approval, while the third factor will work heavily to Democrats’ advantage on Election Day….It is still far too early to speculate about how many seats Democrats will lose (or perhaps gain) in the 2014 elections. But if Obama’s job approval is 40 percent on Election Day, gains would be unlikely, and Democratic losses in the low double digits — perhaps even as many as the 20 or so seats that would accompany losing 11 percent of their caucus, a la 1950 — would be plausible.”
If even half of the reports about the dangers posed by Fukushima pollution are true, Dems might be wise to prepare for nuclear power being a much more significant issue in the 2014 elections.
In his WaPo column, “Hillary Clinton faces a different Democratic Party,” Harold Meyerson has a thoughtful warning for Democratic 2016 front-runner Hillary Clinton: “And therein lies the challenge for Hillary Clinton: How to present herself on economic issues? The surest way she can alienate significant segments of her party — perhaps to the point of enabling a progressive populist such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to enter the race — is to surround herself with the same economic crew that led her husband to untether Wall Street and that persuaded Obama, at least in his first term, to go easy on the banks. The economy isn’t likely to be significantly better in 2016 than it is today, and Democratic voters will be looking for a more activist, less Wall Street-influenced nominee.”


Political Strategy Notes

Hopefully this Quinippiac poll is an outlier. The Democratic tumble seems awfully sudden and steep.
The Virginia Democratic sweep is looking pretty solid — the first VA trifecta since 1989.
Here’s a message that might resonate with swing voters: “Republicans are coming after your sick leave.” As Bryce Covert reports at Moyers & Company “Ten states — Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Wisconsin — have passed preemption laws that ban all cities and counties from enacting paid sick days bills, according to an analysis from the Economic Policy Institute.” When the benefit is gone for government workers, the private sector will not be far behind.
This is just plain weird, even for California. New Age guru Marianne Williamson is an inspiring speaker on political topics and a solid progressive. She could bring a compelling voice to the House. But why run against one of the best progressive Democrats in Congress, when she could move to another district and unhorse a Republican?
Ari Berman reports at Moyers & Company that “Voter Suppression Backfires in North Carolina, Spreads in Texas.”
Kyle Kondik, Managing Editor, Sabato’s Crystal Ball, explores “What a Successful Midterm Looks Like: Setting expectations for both Republicans & Democrats in 2014.” Kondik’s take at this political moment: “Losing just two seats would probably be the best-case scenario for Democrats, and would probably also coincide with a positive national environment that also generates gains in the House: Perhaps not the requisite 17, but maybe somewhere in the high single digits…Democrats’ best hope might be that the Republican Party is so unpopular — according to the HuffPost Pollster average, just 28% have a favorable view of the party compared to 58% who have an unfavorable view — that the typical rules of a midterm, which can be dictated by the approval of a president or the state of the economy, might simply not apply.”
At WaPo’s PostPartisan Jonathan Bernstein makes the case that “It’s time to go nuclear in the Senate.
Larry Summers provides an impressive defense of Obamacare on Morning Joe, noting among other factors that the now-popular Massachusetts health care plan had low enrollment when it was first rolled out.
I say yes. Boehner may have a safe seat. But Dems running in every House district should not hesitate to remind voters about the costs of his lousy leadership. More than any other political figure, he embodies Gridlock, Obstruction and Paralysis. He is Mr. GOP.