Hard to see how Christie recovers enough from his scandal to run as a national candidate. Recent polls suggest Rep. Paul Ryan may be in position to be the most likely beneficiary in terms of GOP presidential nomination, at least for a while. But watch the other right-wing cheese-head, union-bashing Gov. Scott Walker, who has shades-of-Reagan cred with all GOP factions and better media skills.
And the “Ya think?” award for euphemistic headline-writing goes to…
Christie’s shenanigans notwithstanding, I would have to give Marco Rubio the award for political shamelessness, voting against extending unemployment benefits, and then trashing the War on Poverty, despite mountains of data proving it was a success. At least we’ll always have the deliciousl Youtube video of Rubio‘s eyes darting around like a ridiculous deer-caught-in-the-headlights, as he reaches for water.
NYT columnist Russ Douthat talks frames for “better [conservative] policy ideas” for addressing poverty: “But really, the most important thing is to actually have an agenda, which is why at this point I’m not all that concerned about whether Republicans are talking about fighting poverty or the middle class or both: I just want them to be talking up and trying out policy ideas…” Outside of tax cuts for the wealthy and bashing Obamacare, he will likely have a very long wait.
After giving LBJ due credit for his leadership of the War on Poverty, spare a thought for Sargent Shriver, the “architect” of the idea — as well as the Peace Corps, Job Corps, Upward Bound, Vista and Head Start. He also served as Head of the Office of Economic Opportunity, chairman and president of the Special Olympics. As much as any Democrat of his times, he provided the conscience of his party on helping the disadvantaged.
Some interesting stats from Ariel Edwards-Levy’s HuffPo post “America’s Record Number Of Independents Aren’t As Independent As You Might Think“: “The movement in party identification doesn’t represent a seismic change in Americans’ views, however, so much as an increased unwillingness to be tethered to either party, especially the GOP. When Gallup asked those independents whether they leaned toward one side, just a fraction — about 10 percent of Americans — described themselves as purely independent. The rest leaned equally toward one party or the other, with 16 percent expressing more of an affinity for the Democrats, and 16 percent for the GOP…The difference between partisan-leaning independents and their brethren among the party faithful tends to blur at the ballot box. In 2008, 90 percent of Democratic leaners went to now-President Barack Obama, and about 80 percent of Republican leaners to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), according to exit polls.”
At CNN Opinion Julian Zelizer explores “America’s real problem: Too much bipartisanship. ‘ As Zelizer notes in a teaser graph, “But with all of our discussions of difference and discord, too often we miss some areas where both parties are actually in unspoken agreement. There is a consensus view that encapsulates what’s really wrong in Washington.”
If David Weigel’s Slate post “Obamacare. Obamacare. Obamacare: The Republican strategy for winning the Senate in 2014 is a single word” is right, Dems should expect the GOP ACA refusenik governors to hold the line through the elections — which may prove disastrous for them.
Well, at least we won’t need much paint.

Dan Balz’s “What voter turnout means for efforts to remedy income inequality” reviews “Who Votes Now? Demographics, Issues, Inequality, and Turnout in the United States.” by Jan E. Leighley and Jonathan Nagler, and notes “The authors found that there have been some important demographic changes in voting patterns within the overall electorate. Women are now more likely to vote than men. And the gap between black and white participation has narrowed significantly. In the most recent election, blacks voted at higher rates than whites in some states…But in other ways, the overall shape of the electorate has been stable since 1972. During a time of rising income inequality, wealthier and better-educated people continue to vote “at substantially higher rates” than poorer, less-educated people. That gap existed 40 years ago and still does.”
Hotline on Call’s Scott Bland discusses 30 possible swing races in “The Hotline’s House Race Rankings: The House Seats Most Likely to Flip.”
Francine Kiefer’s Monitor post “Democrats to push income inequality as top issue of 2014. Winning tactic?” offers this insight from congressional historian Julian Zelizer at Princeton University: “A lot of Democrats feel the last two years have been consumed with health care … and the deficit,” he explains. “Until you shift the debate, you’re not going to be able to get in a position where you can push for legislation like the [higher] minimum wage. And this is the right time because the Republicans are in a moment of division” over whether to obstruct or to compromise.
A.P.’s Thomas Beaumont has excavated an interesting insight for Democratic strategy in winning back some governorships now held by the GOP: “Democratic strategist Tad Devine said his party needs to look beyond its shrinking union base for new blood…”We need new, younger high-tech Democrats who have not come up through the typical political farm system, are conversant in the new economy and can talk to blue-collar voters,” he said. An example is Mary Burke, a former executive for Trek Bicycles, who is the only announced Democratic challenger to Walker in Wisconsin.”
From “Economic inequality, unemployment top Democrats’ agenda as Congress returns” by Terence Burlij and Katelyn Polantz at PBS News Hour, Sen. Chuck Shumer observes, “This year, dealing with declining middle class incomes and not enough job growth will be the number one issue. And if, on the first day of the new session, the Republican Party says they won’t even support an unemployment benefit extension … they’re going to show themselves so far out of the mainstream, it’s going to hurt them in the election,” Schumer said Sunday on ABC.”
In her Bloomberg Politics post, “Democrats Target Unemployment Aid in 2014 Campaign Pivot ,” Heidi Przybyla notes “Democrats may stand a better chance of winning the unemployment insurance debate than they do a minimum wage increase, which Republicans say could hamper the ability of young Americans in particular to secure employment in a down economy.”
Ed Kilgore has a sobering reminder that repealing Obamacare is only one facet of the Republicans’ extremist health “reform” agenda: “…It’s worth remembering that the conservative movement’s goals in health care policy go beyond repealing Obamacare and extend to major “reforms” of the two big health care entitlements. Voucherizing Medicare and block-granting Medicaid remain central and almost universally supported pillars of the GOP’s agenda. At least some Republicans are sure to keep their eyes on that bigger prize instead of making Obamacare their sole boogeyman. ”
And at Talking Points memo, Dylan Scott explains why “ALEC’s New Obamacare Obstruction Plan Won’t Work.”
At The Daily Beast Jamelle Bouie reports “it’s worth reading a recent paper from Keith G. Bentele and Erin E. O’Brien, which brings statistical analysis to bear on the question of voter identification laws. What they found was surprisingly straightforward: Between 2006 and 2011, if a state elected a Republican governor, increased its share of Republican legislators, or became more competitive while under a Republican, it was more likely to pass voter ID and other restrictions on the franchise. Likewise, states with “unencumbered Republican majorities” and large black populations were especially likely to pass restrictive measures. Their broad conclusion, in other words, is that these laws are the result of fierce partisan competition…”

If you were looking for a succinct critique of the ‘centrist policies are needed to drive prosperity’ meme, check out “Centrists Have No Right to Lecture Anyone on Growth” by Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy Research. As Baker writes in a nut graph responding to NYT column by Bill Keller touting the virtues of centrism, “Keller may not remember, but his center-left were in the driver’s seat putting in place the policies that gave us the stock bubble in the 1990s and the housing bubble in the last decade. The collapse of the second bubble gave us the downturn from which the country is still suffering. It has cost us millions of jobs and already more than $5 trillion in lost output, more than $15,000 for every person in the country. This economic collapse is the opposite of growth.”
Michael O’Brien’s “Different election, same playbook: Why 2014 will look a lot like 2012” at NBC Politics points out that thus far the GOP House and Senate candidates are stuck with the strategy that failed them in the last election — “a referendum on the president and his health care law.” Granted, the Republicans were burdened with a weak candidate at the top of the 2012 campaign. But it could be a very big mistake to think that the same theme will produce different results next year, just because of roll-out glitches that are now largely fixed.
Obamacare has weaknesses than can be fixed. But, to get a good sense of what has changed for the better as a result of the ACA, when 2014 dawned on America yesterday, read Joan McCarter’s Daily Kos post, “Happy Health Insurance Day.” McCarter explains, “The law still has powerful enemies, like the Republican U.S. House of Representatives. But it also has more than six million new beneficiaries, by Kossack Brainwrap’s ongoing count: 2,104,332 in private plans and 4,002,609 in Medicaid/CHIP. For everyone in existing plans, annual and lifetime caps are gone. Some basic stuff–like hospitalizations, prescription drugs and mental health–now has to be covered…From now on, every attempt by Republicans to repeal the law means trying to take away those benefits and all the benefits that have already kicked in for millions of people. And that changes the politics of this law immeasurably.”
Meanwhile, The Plum Line’s Ryan Cooper reports that an estimated 5 million Americans are being denied health insurance because Republican-controlled states have opted out of Medicaid expansion, which TDS managing editor Ed Kilgore terms “the wingnut hole.” Cooper points out that ‘the wingnut hole’ amounts to “the combined population of Delaware, Vermont, the District of Columbia, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming and Alaska…It could very well work out that refusenik states will not even save money because of additional spending on the uninsured in emergency rooms and elsewhere.”
At The New York Times Politics Jonathan Martin and Michael D. Shear report that “Democrats Turn to Minimum Wage as 2014 Strategy.” Shear and Martin note that Dems “have focused on two levels: an effort to raise the federal minimum wage, which will be pushed by President Obama and congressional leaders, and a campaign to place state-level minimum wage proposals on the ballot in states with hotly contested congressional races.”
John Hudak’s post “2014, a make-or-break year for legal pot” at CNN Politics doesn’t explore the political ramification of the marijuana legalization trend for the 2014 elections. But he believes that favorable experiences of states and localities with relaxation of pot laws could broaden the trend considerably moving toward 2016 — and that should help turn out pro-Democratic constituencies.
Froma Harrop has some really juicy economic stats in her San Antonio Express-News post, “Democrats have better economic record,” including “Suppose that in 1929, you put $100,000 in a 401(k) fully invested in stocks. Under the 40 years of Republican presidents, you would have ended up with $126,000. Under the Democrats, you would have amassed a retirement nest egg of $3.9 million!” Also, “The gap between the top 1 percent and bottom 99 percent widened 20 percent in the 40 years Republicans ran the Oval Office. In the Democratic presidential years, it narrowed 16 percent.”
“The Gallup Obama approval daily tracking poll reveals that the president’s approval rating has jumped five points since the days before Christmas from 39%-44%. Disapproval of the president has fallen from 54%-49%,” reports Jason Easley at PoliticusUSA.
From an A.P. report by Charles Babington and Jennifer Agiesta re a new poll by AP/NORC Center for Public Affairs Research: “On the economy, an area historically driven by the private sector, the poll finds a clear public desire for active government. Fifty-seven percent of Americans say “we need a strong government to handle today’s complex economic problems….Even among those who say “the less government the better,” 31 percent feel the nation needs a strong government to handle those complex problems.”

For some insight into the politics of the failure to renew unemployment compensation for 1.3 million jobless, check out Niraj Chokshi’s “Where the 1.3 million people losing unemployment aid this week live” at the Washington Post. States taking the biggest hits include: NJ; NY; PA; CT; NV; GA; CA; and OR.
The GOP’s failure to renew unemployment compensation or take action to reduce long-term unemployment may prove disastrous for their 2014 and 2016 hopes. To better understand why, read Brad Plumer’s Wonkblog post “Seven things you should know about the expiration of unemployment benefits.”
The “dems in disarray” meme is back in the MSM, but WaPo’s Eugene Robinson reports on “The GOP’s growing divide,” indicates that the Republicans may have bigger problems. While Dems have some reason to hope that swing voter opposition to the ACA will shrink as more are covered, the Republicans internal divisions remain deep, with no relief in sight.
For more on this topic, Hotline on Call’s Julie Sobel’s “Ranking the Top 5 Senators Vulnerable in 2014 Primaries” provides perspective on next year’s battle for Senate control.
At the L.A. Times Maeve Reston reports that “Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu adopts risky strategy in bid to keep Senate seat,” keeping her distance from Obamacare, while working to retain Black voters’ support.
Egberto Willies of Daily Kos discusses why “Opting out of ACA because it’s not single payer is dangerous” and why young people shouldn’t take the ‘young invulnerables’ Kool-Aid and refuse ACA coverage.
Speaking of avoiding the Kool-Aid, here’s a good cautionary tale for Libertarians about the downside of supporting Ron Paul and his schitzy philosophy.
Abby Livingston has an interesting Roll Call round-up of “The Best Congressional Campaign Ads of 2013.”
David Rosen’s “Why red state Democrats keep getting left behind” at Campaigns & Elections focuses on Arkansas Democrat Mark Pryor’s battle to hold his Senate seat.
Kind of a downer that “Inside Llewyn Davis” hardly touched on the social protest milieu that energized the NY folk music scene and nurtured Dylan, the Weavers, Seeger, Ochs, Van Ronk, Odetta and Baez, to name just a few of those who howled so eloquently against racism, social injustice and militarism.

Jonathan Weisman’s “With Health Law Cemented, G.O.P. Debates Next Move” at The New York Times does a good job of showing just how utterly bankrupt and bereft of ideas Republicans are when it comes to health care reform alternatives. As Republicans grudgingly accept that repeal and replace just isn’t going to happen, a few of them have ventured what they consider to be salable ‘reforms’. You will not be shocked to see that most of their ideas center around tax credits:

The bill would allow for insurance to be sold across state lines, push small businesses to pool together to buy insurance for their employees, expand tax-free health savings accounts, cap malpractice lawsuits, and offer tax credits of $2,163 for individuals and $5,799 for families to buy health plans.
…Mr. Ryan’s plan will build on one that he and Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, introduced in 2009, according to aides familiar with it. The proposal, called the Patients’ Choice Act, would have eliminated the tax break for employer-provided health care to finance a tax credit of about $5,700 for families and $2,300 for individuals. States would have been asked to create insurance marketplaces like the ones many have created under the Affordable Care Act.

It’s the old ‘throw money at taxpayers’ strategy, which has never delivered quality health care anywhere in human history. Rooted as it is in the cynical assumption that all American voters want is more money, it is likely to be a tough sell, especially to millions of voters who are already benefiting from the ACA, or who have reason to believe they can get better coverage under Obamacare in the near future.
The unavoidable flaw in the GOP’s tax cut/credit panacea is that most American voters will figure out that giving them more money to buy health insurance will probably give the go-ahead to insurance companies to raise their rates — again and again.
Weisman reports that other Republicans are still yammering about repealing the individual mandate. But we can file that one under “not gonna happen,” unless Republicans win the White House and a filibuster-proof majority of the senate in 2016, while holding a strong house majority. That’s asking a lot, especially since only 19 percent of Americans “approve of the way congressional Republicans are handling health care,” as Weisman notes.
Other Republicans are sending up trial balloons, like Rep.Tom Price (GA), who is pushing the ‘Empowering Patients First Act,’ which Weisman reports “would repeal the health care law but keep its prohibition on exclusions for pre-existing conditions in private health insurance.” Again, not gonna happen. More moderate tweaks of the ACA, like Sen. Kelly Ayotte’s proposal to expand health savings accounts and repeal the tax on medical devices may gain increasing currency with her fellow Republicans as they begin to sober up from their tea party hangovers.
Harsh as some of the findings of recent polls are regarding the ACA, the future looks encouraging for Dems, as increasing numbers of Americans enroll and find their coverage has improved — and the GOP has nothing substantial to replace it.

A new CNN/ORC poll conducted 12/16-19 finds that “Negative attitudes extend to both sides of the aisle: 52% believe that the policies of the Democratic leaders in Congress would move the country in the wrong direction; 54% say the same about the policies of congressional Republicans…”
At The Atlantic, Molly Ball addresses “The Battle Within the Democratic Party: A schism between moderates and liberals over economic inequality is the first front in defining a post-Obama platform.” Ball notes that “Stan Greenberg, a longtime Democratic pollster who advised de Blasio’s campaign, insists that most Democrats, including Obama, are on the same page as Warren. In both presidential elections, he noted, “Obama ran on a future for the middle class of restoring prosperity, raising taxes on the wealthy, and an investment agenda. That’s the mainstream of the Democratic Party; it’s the mainstream of the country.”
I’ve always been interested in those comparison charts showing how the U.S. is doing in providing social benefits in comparison to other developed countries, although I’m not sure how effective such comparisons are in selling policy and candidates. If they are, however, Michael Tomasky’s Daily Beast post “America Joins the Developed World, Thanks to Obamacare” is a good one to share.
Sen. Rand Paul’s argument that “When you allow people to be on unemployment insurance for 99 weeks, you’re causing them to become part of this perpetual unemployed group in our economy” elicited this response from Wonkblog’s Ezra Klein: “This is a correlation/causation error of staggering size — and, because it’s coming from a sitting U.S. senator whose vote will help decide whether millions of unemployed families lose the paltry checks that are helping them buy food and shelter and fuel, of staggering consequence.”
Sen. Paul’s callous comments notwithstanding, Dems should make sure that the entire GOP owns it, and this video clip is a good start.
The Plum Line’s George Zornick explains what’s good about the video: “It’s a tough spot, and it relies on language that was popular through the 2012 election that paints the GOP as dedicated protectors of the powerful and wealthy at the expense of struggling Americans…What is particularly useful about this approach is that there’s no pressure coming from the other side — unlike, say, the debate over “Obamacare,” there are no well-funded conservative groups out there pressing for an end to the emergency unemployment program. Based on the polls showing bipartisan support for an extension, the conservative grass roots don’t appear to be fired up about the issue. The passion and activism over jobless benefits is essentially just running in one direction, which is a promising sign.”
Robert Kuttner has a part II HuffPo post, “More About a new Freedom Summer,” fleshing out his idea for a nationwide campaign to provide photo i.d.’s to voters in states where new suppression laws jeopardize their voting rights, backed up by an energetic voter registration mobilization. Kuttner adds, “…the same Roberts Court that overturned key sections of the Voting Rights Act also invalidated limits on political contributions. Donors friendly to Democrats could pour unlimited sums into non-partisan voter registration campaigns, whose net effect would be to help elect Democrats.”
At the Campaign for America’s Future website, Lori Wallach has an informative post, “Get Ready for the 2014 Trade Tsunami” on the fair trade battle that lies ahead. Wallach notes, “The fiery international debates over NAFTA and WTO gave birth to a new fair trade movement in our country. The devastating outcomes triggered by the trade pacts unified ordinary Americans against them. Polls show a majority of Americans – Republicans, Democrats and independents -think these sorts of pacts are bad not only for themselves and their families but for the nation.”
There is a downside to Gov. Christie’s blustering persona, which is apparently also reflected in some of his actions, as Kate Zernike reports in her New York Times article “Stories Add Up as Bully Image Trails Christie.”

Michael Tomasky has some good advice for Dems, along the lines of, ditch the crappy Obamacare ads and have the President get out there with a straightforward idealistic pitch: “He ought to give a speech or a few speeches on campuses aimed specifically at young people and say, “I know a lot of you were excited about me in 2008, and the polls tell me you think I’ve been disappointing, and that’s how things go in Washington. It’s a brutal place. But this is your generation’s chance to help your country become the last advanced democratic country in the world to make sure that all of its citizens have the peace of mind of health care.” It’s their Peace Corps and Vista.”
A.P.’s Steve Peoples reports that “Democrats Work to Raise Number of Female Governors,” pointing out that Republicans have four women governors, compared to the Democrats’ one (Maggie Hassan of NH). Clearly, Dems need to do better, although Peoples could have noted, as did J.P. Green that “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.”
A Media Matters for America Rob Savillo has a bit of good news about the top newspapers’ coverage of Obamacare — they are now reporting more about the benefits of Obamacare, as well as enrollment problems associated with the website rollout.
Mary C. Curtis’s “Holder Determined to Challenge Voter-Suppression Laws” at The Root provides an informative update, which describes the situation in N.C.: “North Carolina went from being the model of a voter-friendly state to the poster child for voting restrictions, in one session of a Republican-dominated state legislature…The North Carolina rules cover much more than the requirement for a photo ID, set to go into effect in 2016. If the law stands, other provisions of the law, set to take effect Jan. 1, would shorten early voting by a week, end preregistration for 16- and 17-year-olds, eliminate same-day voter registration, Sunday voting and straight-ticket voting, increase the number of poll watchers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility, prohibit the counting of provisional ballots of eligible voters who mistakenly go to the wrong precinct and more.”
At TPM Muckraker, Eric Lach’s “Researchers Find Factors Tied To Voting Restriction Bills Are ‘Basically All Racial” notes, “In the paper, the researchers placed the recent restriction efforts in context, as part of a history of measures “trumpeted as protecting electoral legitimacy while intended to exclude the marginalized for a particular political party’s advantage.” They argue that the Republican Party has engaged in “strategic demobilization efforts in response to changing demographics, shifting electoral fortunes, and an internal rightward ideological drift among the party faithful.”
At Daily Kos, Ian Reifowitz has a worthy read, “A Democratic contract with America: How to retake the House and combat economic inequality.”
Now that Dems have successfully pulled off the trifecta in VA, party strategists are looking southward to another state that is rapidly turning purple. For a good update on Dem prospects in the Peach State, read Karen Tumulty’s “Michelle Nunn, Jason Carter hope to rechart the course of Georgia politics.”
Ezra Klein’s “Full employment gives people jobs. But it also gives them power” has a rave review of an important book you can get for free, “Getting Back to Full Employment: A Better Bargain for Working People,” by Dean Baker and Jared Bernstein.” As Klein notes in his conclusion, “Inequality can be attacked in ways that do very little for average workers. By contrast, full employment gives average workers the power to demand a better deal from their employers and thus reduces inequality by giving the working class an overdue raise. Baker and Bernstein’s book is that rarest of things: A read that could make next year much better.”
Sen Chuck Schumer makes the case why Dems should be ready to rumble on the minimum wage hike, job-creation and unemployment insurance, as Dems’ best issues for 2014, reports Evan McMorris-Santoro at Buzzfeed.

Despite the headline, “Uninsured Skeptical of Health Care Law in Poll,” New York Times article by Abby Goodnough and Allison Kopicki notes that “In addition, 64 percent of the uninsured and 54 percent of the general public said they thought providing access to affordable health care coverage for all Americans was the responsibility of the federal government…At the same time, only 37 percent of the general public and 33 percent of the uninsured said the law was so flawed that it should be repealed. That marks a slight shift since the CBS News poll in November, when the federal insurance marketplace was still plagued with technical problems and 43 percent of Americans said the law should be repealed.”
Aaron Blake and Sean Sullivan report at The Fix that, despite skepticism about the implementation of the health care law revealed in a new Washington Post/ABC News poll, “…When you ask people whether they would rather see Obama or the GOP in charge of that implementation, 42 percent pick Obama, while 37 percent pick Republicans. That’s actually the biggest advantage Obama has had on that question since 2010 — marginally bigger than the narrow three-point difference for Obama in September, before the botched rollout.”
Dems have an excellent chance to pick up an important governorship, with PA Republican incumbent Tom Corbett trailing two of his potential Democratic opponents by 12 points each in a new Quinnipiac poll.
At Time Swampland, Jay Newton-Small explains the minimalist “House Republican Strategy for 2014 Victory: Think Small, Do Little.”
From Robert McCartney’s WaPo wrap-up of the Virginia election: “First, in statewide elections, it’s now beyond doubt that Democrats start with a significant advantage. It turns out the 2009 GOP landslide, led by Gov. Bob McDonnell, was an exception fueled by the initial, tea party-led backlash against President Obama…Since then, Democrats have won five straight statewide elections: for president and U.S. Senate in 2012, and for governor, lieutenant governor and now attorney general in November. Democrats hold every statewide elective office for the first time since 1969.”
Also at The Fix, Chris Cillizza spotlights “the Ad Every Democrat Should Be Afraid of.” Clever ad that it might be for this political moment, if Obamacare’s cost savings and success stories are more widely understood by the public by next November, the ad could look like yesterday’s sour grapes.
At Hotline on Call, Alex Roarty reports that “The White House’s out-of-the-blue decision to name Sen. Max Baucus the next ambassador to China means the state’s Democratic governor must appoint a replacement long before next year’s Senate election. And that will fundamentally change one of 2014’s biggest battleground races: Instead of a free-for-all, open-seat battle, Democrats will get to rally behind a better-entrenched incumbent seeking a full term.”
If you are looking for a bellwether House district special election, try FL-13 coming up in March. As Crystal Ballers Kyle Kondik and Larry J. Sabato explain, “If ever there was an apparent bellwether special election, the one coming up in FL-13 this March would seem to be it. The district went 50%-49% for President Obama in 2012, quite similar to his 51%-47% national edge over Mitt Romney. Not only that, but the district is located entirely in Pinellas County, which can fairly be described as one of the key presidential swing counties in the entire country (Obama won this Tampa-area county with 52% of the vote in 2012). The seat, held for decades by the late Rep. Bill Young (R), is probably a necessary part of any future Democratic House majority.” All of the usual caveats about unique local issues and over-generalizing about one election apply, as Sabato and Kondik point out.
Apparently not.

At The PlumLine Greg Sargent reports that “Dems hatch new strategy to pressure GOP on unemployment insurance,” explaining: “Dems who are pushing for an extension have hatched a new…: Once Congress returns, they will refuse to support the reauthorization of the farm bill — which will almost certainly need Dem support to pass the House — unless Republicans agree to restart unemployment benefits with the farm bill’s savings. “Under no circumstances should we support the farm bill unless Republicans agree to use the savings from it to extend unemployment insurance,” Dem Rep. Chris Van Hollen, a top party strategist, told me today. “This is a potential pressure point. We’re going to have to resolve differences in the farm bill because otherwise milk prices will spike. If past is prologue, they are going to need a good chunk of Democrats to pass the farm bill.”…Van Hollen said that a “minimum of $15 billion in savings” was expected from the farm bill, much of it “from the elimination of direct subsidies,” and said it would be unconscionable not to use this money for some form of an extension of unemployment benefits (rather than deficit reduction), which would not only help 1.3 million people, but the economy, too.”
Dan Merica of CNN Politics has a good update, “Democrats’ dream of a blue South: Moon pie in the sky?,” with a focus on Mississippi: “Ask a Southern Democrat if he or she can win statewide, and you will get a wide array of anecdotes and theories. Some point to the last Democratic governor in each state, while others to President Barack Obama winning 43.5% of the vote in Mississippi without spending any money there in 2012…But the most often-cited anecdote — by far — is the success that Southern Democrats had in 2013 municipal elections in Mississippi…For the first time in nearly 30 years, a Democrat was elected mayor of Tupelo, while Meridian elected its first-ever black mayor — a Democrat. After the win, Southern Democrats heralded the day as “Blue Tuesday” and celebrated the victories as a sign of things to come.”
In his post “Are Young Workers the Future of Labor?,” James Cersonsky of In These Times has unearthed a hopeful, though unsourced, statistic: “…Nearly two-thirds of 18-29-year olds have a favorable impression of unions, more than any other age bracket. The time is ripe for labor leaders to bring the next generation into the fold.” If this stat is solid, it is encouraging, given the decline of union membership and the MSM news blackout on union accomplishments.
The Pew Research Center reports a significant decline in the ‘enthusiasm gap’ favoring the GOP between Democratic (and Dem-leaning) vs. Republican (and GOP-leaning) registered voters — about 6 percent today, vs. 14 percent four years ago.
At National Journal’s Hotline on Call, check out Alex Roarty’s “Democrats Divided on How to Recover from Obamacare: Former Clinton pollster Stan Greenberg argues Obamacare could be a political winner. Other Democratic strategists are more nervous.” Roaty writes, quoting Greenberg, “On Thursday, senior Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg told reporters that the Republican focus on hitting Democrats over Obamacare was a political “trap.” Citing a new Democracy Corps poll he helped conduct, Greenberg said if Republican dwell on repealing the law while Democrats focus on fixing the economy, Democrats will come out on top….”I know there is an initial opportunity in going after the rollout … I would argue this is a trap,” he said. “The more they’re on this, the more voters say they’re just part of this extreme partisan gridlock [in Congress], and they’re not addressing the economy and jobs.”
Here’s an interesting quote, from a Forbes Magazine article, no less: “During four years of the hapless George W. Bush administration Republicans actually did control all three branches, but the size of government hardly decreased. It grew…You see, the Republicans talk a big game about small government, but they do so with a forked tongue. A major driver of the busted spending caps was Republican aversion to reductions in defense outlays. This is puzzling. Supposedly it’s in our national security interest to force a weaker economy on Americans so that some of the richest countries in the world can be defended by our military for free.”
In the wake of Kshama Sawant’s election to the Seattle City Council, Bhaskar Sunkara and Micah Uetricht address the question “Can Socialists Win Elections in the U.S.?“, also at ITT.
Required reading for every Democratic candidate preparing to deliver a speech or be interviewed on the topic of education: Blake Fleetwood’s HuffPo post “If You Want the American Dream, Go to Finland,” which includes this nugget: “Not so long ago America had the best school system in the world and the best access to education. Land grant colleges created the largest, most educated middle class in history, which, in turn, led to world supremacy in education, civil liberties, social mobility, science, medicine and a host of other areas…Our education system is static and falling behind other advanced countries — an economic time bomb — whereas Finland is an educational superpower, the best in the west, according to the PISA studies of 470,000 15-year-old students from 65 countries…Our educational progress is merely mediocre compared to the rapid advances being made in other industrialized countries and Asian cities such as Singapore and Shanghai. American students rank 37, behind such countries — in math, the basic sciences and even languages.”
At Wonkblog Dylan Matthews has a discussion with Gawker’s Tom Scocca about the virtues of negativity in politics and the harm done by political ‘smarm,’ which serves to enable conflict-avoidance.

Ezra Klein’s “Inequality isn’t ‘the defining challenge of our time‘” adds some useful perspective to the latest political buzzword. Klein argues that reducing unemployment is a more urgent policy priority than addressing “inequality”:

…Joblessness is still endemic. Growth simply isn’t producing enough jobs. This is a more severe and more urgent problem than inequality. Moreover, fixing it is necessary, though not sufficient, to making real headway against inequality.
It is, however, a harder problem to mobilize a political coalition around. It doesn’t offend our moral intuitions so much as confuse them. Someone making $85,000 annually can look at the incomes of the top one percent and be angry and scared. They can hear that Germany has more social mobility than the does the United States and be offended. The plight of the long-term unemployed and the economy’s stubborn refusal to generate catch-up growth are more abstract concerns to someone with a good job. It’s harder to build a political movement around the intense pain of the few than the more generalized anger of the many.
It’s fair to wonder whether any of this matters. The Obama administration would like to boost demand. But Congress isn’t going to let them. Asking whether inequality or joblessness or growth is the defining economic challenge of our time is like asking how many John Boehners can dance on the head of a pin.
But the same logic applies to inequality: The policies Obama mentioned in his speech — like raising taxes on the rich — also don’t have a shadow of a prayer of passing the House.
The game being played here is a longer one. Of late, inequality become a much more popular research topic — and much more money has been devoted to researching it. Obama consigliere John Podesta founded the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, a think tank dedicated to funding research into inequality. The political system’s focus on the issue is leading to more thinking, more concern, more ideas and more pressure for action.
None of that will matter much now. But it will matter eventually. When the left next gets a chance to make economic policy, what will they choose to do? A world in which inequality is the top concern is a world in which raising taxes on the rich is perhaps the most important policy choice the government can make. A world in which growth and unemployment are top concerns are worlds in which very different policies — from stimulus spending to permitting more inflation — might be the top priorities.

Difficult as the challenge is, reducing unemployment is a more politically-coherent policy priority than addressing “inequality.” Yet tax hikes for the rich and pubic service employment or infrastructure investment, for example, may be popular with the public, but neither one is possible with the Republican blockade in the House.
Economic inequality and unemployment are intertwined to a great extent — it’s hard to envision substantial progress in either without some benefit to the other, provided you define employment in terms of “a job at a living wage.” Too many of the jobs created in recent years, however, provide inadequate pay, which enables festering economic inequality. An increase in decent jobs would likely reduce prevailing pay gaps.
What is certain is that neither malady will be addressed until Democrats secure working majorities in both houses of congress. Klein is right that putting jobs first makes more sense than arguing about how to divide a shrinking pie.