washington, dc

The Democratic Strategist

Political Strategy for a Permanent Democratic Majority

Month: December 2012

Mitch McConnell Finally Shows His Hand

The following post and video by Stan Greenberg are cross-posted from the Carville-Greenberg Memo:
Now that Minority Leader McConnell has admitted what Republicans want in order to avoid the “fiscal cliff,” James and I propose a deal: Democrats will no longer talk about “revenue enhancements” and will instead call them tax increases. In exchange, Republicans can no longer talk about “entitlement reforms” but must admit that they want to cut Medicare and Social Security. If we all start speaking honestly, the 2012 elections sent a very clear message about which side the American people prefer.


In 2011, Senate Minority Leader “Mitch” McConnell Gave Democrats Some Very Good Advice About How to Negotiate With The GOP – Dems Should Take McConnell’s Advice Seriously and Look At What A Specialist In This Particular Kind of Negotiation Recommends.

Immediately after the debt limit debate in 2011, GOP Senate minority leader “Mitch” McConnell made the following profoundly illuminating comment about his party’s basic negotiating strategy:

“I think some of our Members may have thought the default issue was a hostage you might take a chance at shooting. Most of us didn’t think that. What we did learn is this — it’s a hostage worth ransoming.”

Many commentators minimized the importance of this comment because, on the surface, it can be viewed as merely a metaphor. But when one considers how the GOP actually negotiated in regard to the debt limit, it becomes clear that McConnell’s comment actually represents something substantially more significant. His comment describes a clear and distinct negotiating strategy – one that is quite different from other well-known negotiating strategies such as “seeking a win-win outcome” or “getting to yes” that are widely used in business or international affairs.
If we look at President Obama’s current negotiations with the GOP from this distinct perspective, one excellent place to find expert advice is on the PoliceOne database, “the most comprehensive and trusted online destination for law enforcement agencies and police departments worldwide.” On that site there is a quite detailed description of the negotiating strategies that are used in hostage situations, a description written by police expert Lawrence Miller PhD – author of “Hostage negotiations: Psychological strategies for resolving crises.”
The following are some of Dr. Miller’s recommendations for negotiating in hostage situations. These recommendations are actually remarkably illuminating when one systematically compares them with the actual negotiating strategies that President Obama is currently using in his dealings with the GOP. Although the GOP currently has less leverage to hold the economy “hostage” than they did in 2011, they still have a very substantial ability to threaten to damage the economic recovery if Democrats do not acceed to their demands.
Here are some of Miller’s recommendations:

Even with foul-mouthed HTs (i.e. hostage-takers), avoid using unnecessary profanity yourself. Remember that people who are stressed or angry are more likely to use profanity. You are trying to model mature, adult speech and behavior in order to calm the situation.
For emotional HTs, allow productive venting, but deflect dangerous escalation of speech tone and content. In many instances, the whole rationale for the hostage situation is so the HT can “make a point” or “tell my story.”
Focus your conversation on the HT, not the hostages. …Remember that hostages represent power and control to the hostage taker, so try not to do anything that will remind him of this fact…


Political Strategy Notes

The Editors of the American Prospect have “A Strategic Plan for Liberals,” a forum with 11 contributors including: Jan Schakowsky; Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson; John Podesta; Heather McGhee; Thomas Mann and others.
James S. Hohman reports at Politico that “A survey of 800 Obama voters, conducted last month by Global Strategy Group for the moderate Democratic think tank Third Way and shared first with POLITICO, finds that 96 percent believe the federal deficit is a problem and that 85 percent support increasing taxes on the wealthy.”
The New York Times is running a mini-forum on “Do Filibusters Stall the Senate or Give It Purpose?
On MTP Sen Claire McCaskill aptly described the dilemma the Speaker of the House is facing — and a question the media should keep asking: “…I feel almost sorry for John Boehner. There is incredible pressure on him from a base of his party that is unreasonable about this, and he’s got to decide, is his speakership more important or is the country more important?”
Nader does what he does best: Making the case for conscientious consumerism, this time with respect for holiday shopping. Might it also be a good idea for all Dems to make a commitment to buy a couple of gifts with a union label?
Paul West’s “Crunching the numbers: How big was Obama’s win?” at The L.A. Times has a couple of interesting stats: “Overall, the popular vote fell by about 3.5% from 2008 in most of the country — the 42 states that did not feel the full effects of campaign advertising and organizing (turnout, as a percentage of the vote-eligible population, was off by even more). But the popular vote total rose by 2% overall in the eight most heavily contested swing states (Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, Iowa and New Hampshire), all of which Obama won…Obama is likely to become the first presidential candidate since Dwight Eisenhower in 1956 to gain at least 51% of the popular vote in two consecutive elections. And as votes continue to be tallied, his margin over Romney is gradually expanding.”
Norquist is working overtime, badgering the media with his “tea party 2.0” meme, which they are eagerly parroting. At New York magazine, Jason Zengerle explains “Grover’s Best Trick: How he herds reporters.”
In his WaPo op-ed column, E.J. Dionne, Jr. argues that “Democrats could use their own Grover Norquist.”
NYT’s Peter Baker takes a look at President Obama’s tougher negotiation strategy, explaining that the bend-over-backwards conciliatory pose the President took in ’09 is over: “The president is not going to negotiate with himself,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “He’s laid out his position, and Republicans have to come to the table.”
At the National Journal, Ronald Brownstein reports that “The Senate’s Democratic Coalition Is Growing More Unified.” Says Brownstein: “…Almost all major Democratic Senate candidates did a better job than their Republican rivals of unifying their base and attracting more crossover voters. That pattern allowed Democrats to virtually sweep the Senate races in the states Obama that won and to triumph in four states that Romney carried decisively–Indiana, Missouri, Montana, and North Dakota.”