From James Hohmann’s Politico post, “Dem poll: Shutdown could hurt GOP in Senate races” discussing a new PPP poll: “In Georgia, voters opposed the shutdown nearly two to one, 61 percent to 31 percent. Democrat Michelle Nunn ties a generic Republican at 42 percent. After being told “her most likely opponents for next year supported the government shutdown,” Nunn opens a six-point lead over a generic Republican.”
In their CNN Politics post, “Republican Shutdown Pain May Boost Dems,” Dan Merica and Robert Yoon quote Stuart Rothenberg, editor of The Rothenberg Political Report: “”There is now a plausible case for the midterms being a plus for the Democrats, where I would never said that six months ago.” Rothenberg said the GOP is being perceived as “a chaotic, disorganized, confused party” and it is likely that their fundraising numbers will likely begin to slow in the coming months.”Big dollar donors, who are more pragmatic business types, are now worried about where the party is going,” he said. “For Democrats, this helps them for 2014 in recruitment, in fundraising and in overall morale.”
Standard & Poor says the GOP shutdown cost Americans $25 billion in GDP.
For a broader perspective on the cost Republican obstruction, check out “Gridlock Has Cost U.S. Billions, and the Meter Is Still Running” by Annie Lowery Nathaniel Popper and Nelson D. Schwartz at The New York Times. As the authors note, “A new report from Macroeconomic Advisers, prepared for the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, estimates the costs of the fiscal uncertainty of the last few years. Its model suggests that uncertainty since late 2009 has increased certain corporate borrowing costs by 0.38 percentage point; lowered economic growth over that period by 0.3 percent a year, costing at least $150 billion in lost output; and left this year’s unemployment rate higher by 0.6 percentage point. That translates to 900,000 jobs lost.”
Rep. Chris van Hollen outs the sneaky GOP rule change designed to keep the government shut down:

If you thought Texas Republicans might be feeling a little shame in the wake of the Cruz debacle, read Doktor Zoom’s take on the latest drivel from their Light Gov at Wonkette.
Despite the focus on a relatively small band of tea party house members, Politico’s Ginger Gibson points out that “62 percent of House Republicans oppose deal,” which would be a good stat to trot out in Democratic ads in all House elections.
To see how your Rep. voted, check out the House roll call vote right here. Here is the senate tally.
Harold Meyerson has an insightful column at WaPo, calling out the tea party Republicans for their Stalinist antics. Meyerson adds an apt description that could serve as a fitting eulogy for their failed offensive: “Today’s tea party-ized Republicans speak less for Wall Street or Main Street than they do for the seething resentments of white Southern backwaters and their geographically widespread but ideologically uniform ilk. Their theory of government, to the extent that they have one, derives from John C. Calhoun’s doctrine of nullification — that states in general and white minorities in particular should have the right to overturn federal law and impede majority rule. Like their predecessors in the Jim Crow South, today’s Republicans favor restricting minority voting rights if that is necessary to ensure victory at the polls…The tea party’s theory of government and the fear and loathing that many adherents harbor toward minorities find a truer expression in the Confederate flag than in the Stars and Stripes.”

Daily Kos’s David Nir reports on a dozen new MoveOn polls that show significant vulnerability of Republican incumbents in House races. His caveat: “…the problem for Democrats is that, for the most part, these seats are held by strong Republican campaigners who have done a good job of convincing voters of their moderation and who tend to raise money in bunches. That creates a vicious cycle whereby would-be Democratic candidates shy away from challenging these incumbents, thus making them look all the more invincible when the next election rolls around.”
At The Guardian, Bob Garfield’s “False equivalence: how ‘balance’ makes the media dangerously dumb: We’ve seen it in climate change reporting; we see it in shutdown coverage. Journalists should be unbiased, yes, but not brainless” observes: “As an institution, the American media seem to have decided that no superstition, stupidity, error in fact or Big Lie is too superstitious, stupid, wrong or evil to be disqualified from “balancing” an opposing … wadddyacallit? … fact. Because, otherwise, the truth might be cited as evidence of liberal bias…what is so difficult about calling bullshit on a lie?”
Media Matters staff has an excellent round-up of recent false equivalence “reporting” by talking heads on TV.
Kyle Trygstad’s Roll Call post “The Cheap Seats: Senate Majority Determined in Inexpensive States” reports that major ad battles are taking shape in states where ads are cheaper: “Cheap markets allow campaigns, national party committees and outside groups to afford significant ad buys earlier and stay on the air longer. But they also open up avenues for smaller independent groups whose less-robust war chests wouldn’t go nearly as far if they were forced to spend in major markets such as Chicago, Philadelphia or Washington, D.C…Democratic media consultant Philip de Vellis, whose firm Putnam Partners produced Heitkamp’s ads, says cheap markets and more ads allow campaigns to deliver a message over a series of spots — not cram everything into one “kitchen sink” attack ad.”
Dems have a “solid shot” at picking up the House seat being vacated by retiring FL Republican Bill Young, according to Hotline on Call’s Sarah Mimms.
Steve Benen’s “The electoral consequences of the shutdown” at MaddowBlog spotlights another GOP House seat ready for Democratic picking, NE-2, now held by Rep. Lee Terry. In his post, Benen also puts the shutdown drama in prudent political perspective: “Everything you’ve heard of late about 2014 is true. Polls show Republican support collapsing, but the midterm elections are still a year away, and it’s too early to make firm predictions…But this story out of Omaha offers an important reminder about the consequences of the Republican Party’s ongoing disaster — they haven’t ensured electoral setbacks next year, but they’ve certainly laid the groundwork for defeat.”
Looking towards 2014 elections, Democratic policy-makers would do well to check out “Working Longer: Older Americans’ Attitudes on Work and Retirement,” a recent poll conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. The poll doesn’t include data on political party preferences of the respondents, but it does shed light on which policies this high-turnout constituency favors.
Democrats should read Joseph Stiglitz’s New York Times Opinionator column, “Inequality is a Choice” and then get focused on distilling some of his lucid observations into message points, including: “In America, nearly one in four children lives in poverty; in Spain and Greece, about one in six; in Australia, Britain and Canada, more than one in 10. None of this is inevitable. Some countries have made the choice to create more equitable economies: South Korea, where a half-century ago just one in 10 people attained a college degree, today has one of the world’s highest university completion rates.”
Richard Parker (not the tiger, the Harvard proff) has an amusing ain’t-gonna-happen-idea which lays bare the hypocrisy in tea party lunacy: “Suspend Obamacare and cut the budget–just as House Republicans have demanded–but here’s the compromise: do all the cutting in just the 80 or so congressional districts of the most ardent Tea Party members.”

If you thought recent opinion polls were bad news for Republicans, dig this excerpt about the latest NBC/WSJ poll conducted October 7-9, from Ariel Edwards-Levy’s HuffPo post, “Poll: Republicans ‘Badly Damaged’ By Shutdown Battle“:

Americans blamed Republicans over President Barack Obama for the shutdown by a margin of 22 percentage points, with 53 percent saying the GOP deserved more blame, and 31 percent saying Obama did. Approval ratings for the Republican Party and the tea party were at 24 percent and 21 percent respectively — both record lows as measured by NBC/WSJ.

There’s no avoiding the conclusion that 22 percent is a pretty astounding blame gap. It does appear that the public is beginning to get it that the shutdown, the hardship it is already causing all across America and the threat of another retirement investments debacle is overwhelmingly due to Republican extremism and obstruction. There’s more:

Voters were 8 points more likely to say they’d prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress over a Republican-controlled Congress, a 5-point shift toward the Democrats since last month. Support for the new health care law, the touchstone of the government shutdown, rose a net 8 points from September, while the belief that government should do more to solve problems was up 8 points from June.

“That is an ideological boomerang,” said GOP Pollster Bill McInturff, “if there is a break, there is a break against the Republican position.” In addition, 70 percent of the respondents agreed that Republicans are “putting their own political agenda ahead of what is good for the country,” while about half said the same for the President. Further, reports Edwards-Levy:

WSJ/NBC pollsters said the survey showed some of the most dramatic shifts they had seen in decades in public attitudes toward the well-being of the country, the direction of the economy and wider political sentiment, according to the Journal.

The poll also revealed a 6 point increase in the percentage of respondents who rated their feelings toward Speaker John Boehner as “very negative” since the last time the poll asked the question in January. You have to wonder if that has anything to do with Boehner’s petulant interview on ABC’s ‘This Week’ last Sunday.

Harold Meyerson has a creative alternative for those 21 or so House Republicans who want to support a ‘clean CR,’ but fear being primaried by the tea party — declare themselves Independents. As Meyerson explains in his Washington Post column, “…To vote his beliefs and duck that challenge, all a center-right Republican has to do is declare himself an independent…This is hardly a course to be taken lightly. It entails the loss of congressional seniority and would cause rifts with friends and allies…There is no guarantee of reelection…But others have taken this course and survived — most recently, former senator Joseph Lieberman, who…reconfigured himself an independent and won reelection. Many of the House members tagged as supporters of a clean resolution, such as New York’s Peter King and Pennsylvania’s Charlie Dent, come from districts in the Northeast that aren’t as rabidly right as some in the Sunbelt. Others, such as Virginia’s Scott Rigell and Frank Wolf, come from districts with large numbers of federal employees, who almost surely are not entranced by the tea party’s anti-government jihad.”
At Facing South, Sue Sturgis reports that Art Pope, NC’s jr. Koch brother, is feeling some grass roots heat: “As Pope attempts to distance himself from controversial big-money politics, North Carolina activists continue to shine a spotlight on his outsized influence and what it has wrought.”
In a USA Today op-ed, Will Marshall presents an interesting idea: To seize the high ground, “…Democrats will need to abandon their ritual business-bashing, embrace the productive forces in U.S. society and honor companies that are investing in America’s future…The nation’s job drought is really an investment drought…Many companies are investing at home, and they deserve recognition. For the second year, the Progressive Policy Institute has ranked the top 25 companies making the biggest bets on America’s economic future. All told, these Investment Heroes spent nearly $150 billion last year on new plants, buildings and equipment.” Short of laws that protect jobs in the U.S., it’s an idea worth exploring, although the inclusion of Walmart among the “heros” is an eyebrow-raiser.
In his Politico post, “Poll: Terry McAuliffe increases his lead over Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia governor election,” Tal Kopan notes, “Virginia gubernatorial hopeful Terry McAuliffe has widened his lead over his Republican challenger Ken Cuccinelli in a new poll that puts him up 8 points…The Democrat led the Virginia attorney general 47 percent to 39 percent in a Quinnipiac poll of likely voters out Thursday. In September, Quinnipiac found McAuliffe leading 44 percent to 41 percent.”
Turns out the latest Gallup poll I noted in Tuesday’s ‘notes’ post did have some data on approval ratings of the two parties, omitted though it was in Frank Newport’s report. According to Linda Feldmann’s Monitor summation, “The Republican Party is viewed favorably by only 28 percent of the American public, a 10-percentage-point drop in just the past month, according to the latest Gallup poll…It’s the lowest favorability number ever recorded for either party by Gallup, which began asking the question in 1992.” Democrats’ favorability also dropped in the last month, down four percentage points from 47 percent to 43 percent.”
John Dickerson’s “Are Moderate Republicans the Shutdown’s Biggest Hypocrites?” at Slate.com has a cautionary observation for Dems: “Right now, these members of the Clean Caucus have the best of all worlds. They can proclaim that they want to do the reasonable thing–which pleases their moderate voters–but never cast the vote that provokes the wrath of the party’s most active and punitive wing. This is how Boehner reads their maneuvers, and they can thank him for allowing them to have it both ways.”
But, as Steve Peoples explains at Salon.com, DCCC Chairman Rep. Steve Israel points out that the shutdown gives Dems a potent edge in the uopcomming 2014 midterm elections, with 68 competitive districts in play: “The longer the Republicans continue this reckless and irresponsibility … the weaker they become going into the 2014 cycle.”
If this doesn’t make Boehner sweat,nothing will: “Their frustration has grown so intense in recent days that several trade association officials warned in interviews on Wednesday that they were considering helping wage primary campaigns against Republican lawmakers who had worked to engineer the political standoff in Washington,” report Eric Lipton, Nicholas Confessore and Nelson D. Schwartz, in the New York Times.
At Daily Kos, the blogger ‘War on Error’ flags a series of revealing inter-active charts depicting the relationships between the Koch brothers’ and other wingnut foundations and PACs, lending great credence to Hillary Clinton’s warning about the “vast right-wing conspiracy.” Most disappointing revelation in the charts may be that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation supports ALEC. Open source software, anyone?

NBC News political reporter Michael O’Brien reports, “Thirty-eight percent of Americans said Republicans were to blame for the shutdown, versus 30 percent who blame the Obama administration and 19 percent who blame both, according to the Pew poll, which was conducted in the days since the shutdown came to pass. (For context, a Pew poll before the shutdown found that 39 percent would blame the GOP, 36 percent would blame Obama and 17 percent would blame both if the shutdown were to occur.)…The ABC News/Washington Post poll, meanwhile, found that 70 percent of Americans disapprove of the way congressional Republicans are handling negotiations over the federal budget, while just 24 percent approve. (Last week, 26 percent approved of the GOP’s handling, and 63 percent disapproved.)
Don’t feel bad if you didn’t notice that the Obama administration captured another al Qaeda bigwig The story has been all but smothered by shutdown coverage.
In his National Journal post, “19 Times Democrats Tried to Negotiate With Republicans: The GOP’s biggest talking point of the shutdown is only true if you ignore everything that happened before last week,” Alex Seitz-Wald makes an important point that apparently confounds the rest of the print and broadcast media.
At the Nieman Journalism Lab, Mark Coddington reports on “False Equivalence in Shutdown Reporting,” and flags several articles on the topic, including a post by Jay Rosen, who notes that “with the critique of ‘false equivalence’ now a part of the journalist’s daily life and the rise of point-of-view reporting to normal status online, the artifice is shakier than ever.” We hope.
For one of the better recent discussions of the problem, read Time Magazine’s “Not “Both Sides,” Now: Why False Equivalence Matters in the Shutdown Showdown” by James Poniewozik. “Both sides are to blame; the truth is somewhere in between”-that has always been the political media’s happy, safe place…Seeming fair becomes more important than being fair…At worst, a legitimate impulse (“Let’s make sure we’ve checked out the other side”) becomes skewing reality for the sake of appearances (“We have to put in an example of the other side doing this”).”
CBS News says there are 215 House votes ready for a clean CR to end the shutdown, 2 votes short of a majority. Many believe the spotlight would flush out a healthier majority.
At Wonkblog, Neil Irwin’s “Can business take the Republican Party back from the Tea Party?” notes “…So far the business-oriented, pragmatic wing of the Republican coalition has done more private grumbling about their Tea Party brethren than outright intra-party warfare. The question for 2014 is whether the current shutdown and debt ceiling crisis pushes them to actually recruit and fund candidates — and whether Republican primary voters in at least a few districts buy the pitch those candidates are selling.”
Beth Reinhard’s National Journal post, “Democrats Read Virginia As A War-on-Women Winner: Success with the strategy in 2013’s marquee race has Democrats hoping it will be equally effective in big 2014 contests” offers some promising observstions for Dems, including: “What we’re seeing in Virginia is incredibly validating,” said Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which is airing a $1 million television and radio campaign against Cuccinelli. “I believe this race has set the table for these issues and for women to be determinative in 2014.”…Closing the gender gap was one of the major goals identified by the Republican National Committee in a sweeping review of the 2012 election, but a new United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection poll suggests the GOP is still struggling to connect with women. Only 14 percent of women said the Republican Party better represented their views. More than twice as many women, 33 percent, said the party had drifted further away, while 46 percent saw no change.”
Gallup oozes out yet another ‘congress job approval’ poll that somehow avoids the “which party is to blame” question.

There is a way to render House Speaker John Boehner’s obstruction of a clean vote on a budget continuing resolution irrelevant, and Democratic leaders have apparently decided that it’s time to use it. As Molly Jackman explains at Brookings:

The discharge process begins with a petition filed no sooner than 30 days after the bill was referred to committee. That petition would require 218 signatures- not an implausible goal to meet in the case of the current CR. If the number of signatories passes this threshold, the petition is placed on the Discharge Calendar, where it waits for at least 7 days. At that point, it becomes privileged business on the second and fourth Mondays of the month (except during the last 6 days of the session). Any member who signed the petition can be recognized to offer the discharge motion. When the motion is called up, debate is limited to 20 minutes, divided evenly between the proponents and opponents. If the motion is rejected, the bill is not eligible for discharge again during that session and is returned to committee. If adopted, any member who signed the discharge petition can motion to call up the bill for immediate consideration. At that point, the bill becomes the business of the House, and an affirmative vote of the majority leads to its adoption….

Jackman, however, is skeptical that it will work, since the procedure would require 18 Republican moderates to openly defy their leaders. “It would take some real gutsy Republicans – who have a lot to personally gain from ending the shutdown — to make this move,” adds Jackman.
Even if the discharge petition fails, however, the process will out the ‘moderate’ Republicans who claim to support a clean CR, but won’t vote for it, as political trolls who feign support for functional government. Of the 21 or so Republican House members who say they want a clean CR, some of them are in purplish districts. If they out themselves as phonies, that could help Dems pick up seats in 2014. Here’s a list of 21 Republicans HuffPo’s Jennifer Bendery identifies as saying they are read for a clean CR:

Rep. Pat Meehan (R-Pa.): “At this point, I believe it’s time for the House to vote for a clean, short-term funding bill to bring the Senate to the table and negotiate a responsible compromise.” [Press Release, 10/1/13] Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.): “Time for a clean [continuing resolution].” [Official Twitter, 10/1/13] Rep. Jon Runyan (R-N.J.): “Enough is enough. Put a clean [continuing resolution] on the floor and let’s get on with the business we were sent to do.” [Burlington County Times, 10/1/13] Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.): A Fitzpatrick aide tells the Philadelphia Inquirer the congressman would support a clean funding bill if it came up for a vote. [Philadelphia Inquirer, 10/1/13] Rep. Lou Barletta (R-Pa.): Barletta said he would “absolutely” vote for a clean bill in order to avert a shut down of the government. [Bethlehem Morning Call, 10/1/13] Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.): King thinks House Republicans would prefer to avoid a shutdown and said he will only vote for a clean continuing resolution to fund the government, according to the National Review Online. [NRO, 9/30/13] Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.): The California Republican told The Huffington Post he would ultimately support a clean continuing resolution. [Tweet by The Huffington Post’s Sabrina Siddiqui, 9/30/13] Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.): “I’m prepared to vote for a clean [continuing resolution].” [The Huffington Post, 9/29/13] Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.): A Wolf aide told The Hill that he agrees with fellow Virginia Rep. Scott Rigell (R) that it’s time for a clean continuing resolution. [The Hill, 10/1/13] Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.): A Grimm aide told The Huffington Post that the congressman supports a clean continuing resolution. [10/1/13].
Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-Minn.): A local news anchor in Minnesota tweeted that Paulsen told him he would vote for a clean resolution if given the chance. [Blake McCoy Tweet, 10/1/13] Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.): A constituent of Wittman’s sent The Huffington Post an email she got from the congressman indicating he would vote for a clean funding bill but hasn’t had “an opportunity to do so at this point.” [10/1/13] Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.): LoBiondo told The Press of Atlantic City he’ll support “whatever gets a successful conclusion” to the shutdown and a clean funding bill “is one of those options.” [The Press of Atlantic City, 10/1/13] Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.): Forbes told The Virginian-Pilot that he supports the six-week clean funding bill that passed in the Senate. [The Virginian-Pilot, 10/2/13] Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.): The congressman issued a statement saying he would “vote in favor of a so-called clean budget bill.” [Office of Rep. Jim Gerlach, 10/2/13].
Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.): Lance’s chief of staff confirmed to The Huffington Post that he told a constituent on Wednesday that Lance has voted for clean government funding bills in the past “and would not oppose doing so again should one be brought to the floor.” [10/2/13] Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho): Simpson told a Roll Call reporter Tuesday night, “I’d vote for a clean CR because I don’t think this is a strategy that works.” [Daniel Newhauser Tweet, 10/1/13] Rep. Bill Young (R-Fla.): Young told Tampa Bay Times reporter Alex Leary that he’s ready to vote for a clean funding bill. “The politics should be over,” he said. “It’s time to legislate.” [Alex Leary Tweet, 10/2/13] Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.): The congressman told Miami Herald reporter Marc Caputo that he would vote for a clean funding bill, provided it has the same funding levels contained in the Senate-passed bill. [The Miami Herald, 10/2/13] Rep. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.): “I would take a clean (continuing resolution).” [Observer-Dispatch, 10/2/13] Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.): A Davis constituent tells The Huffington Post that a Davis aide told him Wednesday, “Congressman Davis is prepared to vote ‘yes’ on a clean CR.” Asked for comment, Davis spokesman Andrew Flach told HuffPost that Davis isn’t “going to speculate” on what bills may come up in the House and “will continue to vote for proposals brought to the floor that will fund the federal government.” [10/2/2013] Rep. Tim Griffin (R-Ark.): Asked on Twitter if he would support a clean funding bill if it came up for a vote, Griffin tweeted, “sure. Ive already said i would support.” [Official Twitter, 10/2/13].

In his (earlier) list of 17 Republican House members who profess support for a clean CR, TNR’s Nate Cohn observes, “most are from relatively competitive territory: Romney only won five of the 17 districts by more than 3 points.” However, adds Cohn:

…Perhaps as a result of their moderation, relatively few of these representatives appear vulnerable heading into 2014. Each of these candidates won by at least 7 points last November. The Cook Political Report only characterizes one seat as “lean Republican;” the rest are either “likely” or “safe” Republican.

It’s possible that skepticism about the discharge petition underestimates mounting public anger about the shutdown, which is topic “A” at social media forums, water coolers and dinner tables and across the country. A new poll by Public Policy Polling, for example, indicates that discontent with Republicans has risen to the point where 17 “battleground districts” held by Republicans are now leaning Democratic. According to the HuffPo report, “GOP In Grave Danger Of Losing House In 2014, PPP Polls Show“:

For Democrats to win a House majority, 17 seats would need to switch to their party’s favor. Results show that would be within reach, as Republican incumbents are behind in 17 of the districts analyzed: CA-31, CO-06, FL-02, FL-10, FL-13, IA-03, IA-04, IL-13, KY-06, MI-01, MI-07, MI-11, NY-19, OH-14, PA-07, PA-08, WI-07. In four districts, the incumbent Republican fell behind after respondents were told their representative supported the government shutdown: CA-10, NY-11, NY-23, VA-02. Three districts saw GOP incumbents maintain their hold over their Democratic challengers, even after hearing their elected officials’ views on the shutdown, including CA-21, NV-03 and OH-06.

Clearly, if the discharge petition passes, it will be by a tight margin. As a safety precaution, Democratic leaders should make it known that any Democratic House member who fails to support the clean CR will experience full party discipline, since any defectors on this are DINOs when it really counts. Meanwhile, OFA, MoveOn and all progressive groups should put a full-court press on the 21 aforementioned House Republicans.

CNN.com’s Deirdre Walsh reports that GOP moderates huddle as conservatives set agenda , noting that a “senior Republican familiar with the talks” says the effort may be small now, but it is expanding, and will grow as more Republicans hear from constituents back home that are hurting from the shutdown…”It’s Day 2 of the shutdown — we went from six or seven (members) to over 20 today…”
The New Republic’s Nate Cohn answers the question “Who Are the 17 Republicans Willing to End the Shutdown?” Cohn names names and adds, “Fifteen of the 17 representatives are from the mid-Atlantic or California. Perhaps unsurprisingly, most are from relatively competitive territory: Romney only won five of the 17 districts by more than 3 points…Perhaps because of their districts, these representatives are also relatively moderate–13 are among the 40 most liberal Republicans, as measured by DW-nominate. Eleven of the 17 representatives voted for the Senate’s fiscal cliff compromise last January…And perhaps as a result of their moderation, relatively few of these representatives appear vulnerable heading into 2014. Each of these candidates won by at least 7 points last November. The Cook Political Report only characterizes one seat as “lean Republican;” the rest are either “likely” or “safe” Republican.”
At the Week Keith Wagstaff reports on an emerging (we hope) trend in his post, “Blaming Republicans for the government shutdown: The end of false equivalence?: Even the Wall Street Journal editorial board is urging the GOP to throw in the towel”
Sabato’s Crystal Ball guest columnists John Sides and Lynn Vavreck offer this insight about “persuadable voters”, gleaned from their book, The Gamble: Choice and Chance in the 2012 Presidential Election : “…We can look at what voters told us in December 2011 and then after the election in November 2012. The vast majority of these voters — about 87% — preferred Obama, Romney or some other candidate in December and reported voting for the same candidate in November. That suggests a lot of stability — which isn’t surprising given that most voters are partisans and partisans are increasingly loyal in presidential elections…But that also leaves 13% who shifted — some from Obama to Romney or vice versa, and most of the rest from being undecided or preferring another candidate to preferring Obama or Romney. That’s a lot more movement than the 5% shift that averaging the horserace polls would suggest…How is it possible that 13% shifted their votes but the horserace polls moved so little? The answer is that these shifts — between the candidates, into and out of being undecided — usually didn’t advantage one or the other of the candidates.”
Also at the Crystal Ball, UNC Charlotte Professor Emeritas Theodore S. Arrington performs “simple least square” regression calculations to determine ‘partisan bias’ in the upcoming House elections. He concludes, “Looking forward from the 2012 election result, this research finds that Democrats would have to get around 53% of the two-party national House vote to have a shot at winning a majority in the lower chamber.” Arrington adds, “This is not impossible, as they performed above this level in 2006 and 2008, but it makes the task of winning a majority of the House seats an uphill climb.”
GOP SHUT DOWN COSTS AMERICANS OVER $30 MILLION PER DAY. Howzat for a headline? At Daily Kos, Laura Clawson reports on the cost of federal park shutdowns inb surrounding communities: “The National Park Service is losing $450,000 a day in entrance fees and other revenue thanks to the Republican shutdown, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg in park-related economic shutdown losses. The communities surrounding national parks will suffer, too, to the tune of $30 million a day…With vacationers banned from the parks, they won’t pass through towns by park entrances. That means business lost for hotels and restaurants, grocery stores, supply stores and more.” So much fore the GOP’s “friend of small business” meme. And none of the estimates affecting other government agencies thus far factor in the opportunity cost of not doing the peoples’ business.
Worse, yes worse, Josh Levs reports at CNN: “The government shutdown is “extremely damaging” to U.S. intelligence operations, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Wednesday…The shutdown “seriously damages our ability to protect the safety and security of this nation,” he told a Senate panel…Approximately 70% of employees were furloughed, he said.” So much for the Republicans’ cred for protecting our national security.
At Alternet, syndicated talk show host Thom Hartmann does a good job of explaining how the Boehner shutdown robbed the ACA exchange rollout of millions of dollars of free television publicity: “Every news organization in the country had prepared detailed packages and reports on what Obamacare is, how to sign up for it…and all the details…Obamacare experts were being lined up as guests for September 30 and October 1 on radio and television networks and stations across the country. Local stations planned their local versions of this, talking about their state programs…Those two days we’re going to be a big deal, programming wise. I know. I’m in the industry. We were planning it, too…All those programs on radio and television would have given the equivalent of millions of dollars worth of advertising to Obamacare, and caused tens of millions of young people to learn about the program, get excited about the program, and begin signing up right away.” Nearly all of those programs were blacked out by the shutdown.
Liberal Democrat though I am, I like this image crafted by Grover “The Pledge” Norquist, as reported by Talking Points Memo’s Igor Bobic: “Cruz said he would deliver the votes and he didn’t deliver any Democratic votes. He pushed House Republicans into traffic and wandered away.” More humane, at least, than drowning the baby in the bathtub.

If the real purpose of the Republican shutdown of the federal government was to blow the debut of the Affordable Care Act exchange marketplaces off the front pages of newspapers and lead stories of TV news, it succeeded beyond the GOP’s hopes.
As we go to press, for example, there are no above-the-fold stories spotlighting the debut of Obamacare exchanges on The New York Times electronic edition front page. You have to scroll down, way down, to see the small type headline “Text: Obama’s Remarks on the Budget and Health Law.”
Ditto for the Washington Post, except their small type headline “Lane: What the GOP missed on Obamacare” is perched in the “Opinion” box, not too far below the electronic “fold,” and a little lower in the box they have “Wemple: Fox News has lost it on Obamacare” and then the WaPo editorial Board’s “Obamacare’s Big Moment” and “Site to buy Obamacare policies is ready, but glitches likely, officials warn.” Other stories in both of the top newspapers referenced Obamacare only in connection to the Shutdown.
On the front page of USA Today‘s electronic edition, the nations 3rd ranking in circulation numbers, there were no separate stories about the opening of the health care exchanges under the Affordable Care Act. It was mentioned in one headline in connection with the shutdown. Damn near all other headlines were about the shutdown.
At the number one in circulation Wall St. Journal, again nothing above the fold, but you can scroll far down to the “health” box for three stories about the ACA exchanges debut. Credit the L.A. Times (4th in circulation), however, with one interesting barely above-the-fold headline and sub-head, “Lazarus: GOP will stop at nothing to deny Obama his due on healthcare reform: The outlandish rhetoric over the Affordable Care Act has nothing to do with healthcare or the role of government. It’s about not giving Obama credit for it.”
I didn’t survey broadcast media, But the top morning political talk show, Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinsk tried to give the ACA exchanges debut a plug in their lede, but was quickly smothered by a tsunami of predictable jabber about the shutdown. UPDATE: ‘Morning Joe’ did provide a short segment on the ACA exchanges featuring progressive commentators later in the program.
MSN.com, a top home web page in terms of hits, did feature “Glitches or not, health exchanges are here” above the fold, but nothing on the ACA exchange roll-out in the 9 larger-type rotating headlines.
Wingnut media strategists are no doubt slapping high fives at spoiling the debut of the health exchanges, which, on a normal day would have gotten most of the headlines and ledes, encouraging people to sign up. The Republican strategy was to use the temporary shutdown to shrink the number of enrollees on the important first day. Mission accomplished, although we will have to wait until a tally is completed to get some inkling of how successful they were.
The hope for ACA supporters is that the shutdown will backfire, as seems likely according to recent polls, and hurt Republicans in 2014. See, for example, this just-released report, “American Voters Reject GOP Shutdown Strategy 3-1, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Dems Up 9 Points in 2014 Congressional Races.”
But the Republicans are counting, not without reason, on the short memory of the electorate and a whole different set of voter concerns a year from now. The other hope for the ACA is that the benefits of the law will increasingly sink in and enrollment figures will improve significantly in the months ahead.
Boehner and the GOP leaders calculated that they would get bad press for a few days before they cut a deal, and that it was a small price to pay for damaging the Obamacare health exchanges grand opening. All would be forgotten when voters go to the polls 13 months from now. It’s up to Dems to prove them wrong.

Even if there is a government shutdown, it won’t delay the implementation of Obamacare, reports Linda Feldman at The Monitor: “The ACA is funded mostly through multiyear and mandatory spending, so a failure to agree on annual appropriations wouldn’t touch its funding.”
So here’s the GOP’s equally-doomed “Plan B” for killing Obamacare, according to Linda Mascaro of the L.A. Times: “Top Republicans want to get the legislation back to the House in time to give Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) an opportunity to attach new healthcare repeal amendments that might have a better chance at achieving GOP policy goals.”
Meanwhile, Erika Eichelberger reports at Mother Jones that “The 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), known as the Motor Voter law, says that DMVs and other state agencies that provide public assistance have to provide voter registration services. The Obama administration has said that means that both the state-run exchanges, and the federally-run exchanges that are being rolled out in states where Republican governors have refused to set them up, will have to comply with the Motor Voter law. But now it appears that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is wavering on whether it will require the 35 federally-run exchanges to offer voter registration, according to a recent report by the left-leaning policy shop Demos and the voting rights organization Project Vote.”
At The Atlantic Molly Ball writes about the Heritage Foundation’s transformation from once-respected conservative think tank into a safe house for lowbrow partisan hackage.
From Emily Swanson’s HuffPo Politics post, “Americans Think GOP Mostly Helps the Rich“: “…According to a new HuffPost/YouGov poll…51 percent of Americans think Republicans are most interested in helping the rich, while 28 percent said they’re most interested in helping the middle class. Another 7 percent said the GOP is most interested in helping the poor….Americans overall were roughly evenly divided on what they think the Democratic Party is up to. Twenty-eight percent said the party works for the rich, 27 percent said the middle class, and 25 percent said the poor.”
In his Op-Ed at The Hill Former Republican Senator Judd Gregg says: “Most Americans these days are simply ignoring Republicans. And they should. The self-promotional babble of a few has become the mainstream of Republican political thought. It has marginalized the influence of the party to an appalling degree.”
At Mother Jones, David Corn explains why “Obama is the most wily tactician in the nation’s capital since Lyndon Johnson.”
I’m not Sure Stefan Hankin has proved his thesis in his Washington Monthly post “How Democrats Lost the Colorado Recall Election.” But his argument is interesting: “A post-election analysis by the Atlas Project (here) determined that together the Democratic campaigns and outside groups had spent almost $2.3 million on both races, while their Republican counterparts merely spent a little over $500,000…This is not to say that the campaigns in Colorado should have given up TV advertising completely. However, in a low turnout election, in an off year, at an odd time, where mail ballots were not allowed, Democrats and their allies, decided to air 3,569 commercials instead of investing more resources in determining which voters they needed to turnout and which voters they needed to persuade to vote in these elections.”
The American Prospect’s Paul Waldman has a bit of a jaw-dropper in the title of his post, “Politico Published More than 30 Articles about Ted Cruz Today.” A good subtitle might have been “Bomb-Thrower Scams MSM with Nothingburger.” Waldman explains “most people who are not Republican activists/primary voters will within a few weeks forget what this whole thing was about. They’ll remember that that guy Cruz got up and talked for a long time, and it had something to do with Obamacare. And that’s about it.”

Manu Raju and Byron Tau report at Politico that Democrats are exploring ways to leverage Super PACs “to dedicate huge resources to usually low-key state races to help their respective parties change the partisan makeup of legislatures across the country.
Tell it straight, rag of record. It’s Kamikaze Republicans, not “Kamikaze Congress.”
This will probably shock his tea party base. It’s not quite as assertive as McCain’s “In the United States Senate, we will not repeal or defund Obamacare. We will not. And to think we can is not rational,” but it does appear that some Republicans are making a break to join the reality-based community as regards the Affordable Care Act.
E. J. Dionne, Jr. reports on why two more Republican governors have seen the light on Obamacare.
At Op-Ed News, James Thindwa notes in his post against felon-disenfranchisement, “A study by sociologists Chris Uggen and Jeff Manza found that former felons could have changed the outcomes of seven U.S Senate elections between 1978 and 2000.” Thindwa adds “Progressives could tip the scales in this internecine struggle and cause a tectonic shift in the incarceration debate. An important source of energy and inspiration is the army of grassroots and legal organizations that blocked, diluted, repealed or postponed anti-voter laws in 14 states over the last two years. Another key model is creative action such as North Carolina’s “Moral Mondays.” The weekly rallies and civil disobedience right at the seat of state power brought national focus to the state’s nefarious voter suppression laws and lowered Gov Pat McCrory’s approval ratings from 48 percent to 39 percent. This organizing model could be especially effective if it incorporated real institution building and expansive voter registration.”
Rand Paul is clearly hoping that his libertarian philosophy will resonate with young people, many of whom like libertarian views on social issues, like same-sex marriage, pot and isolationism. But the ‘Achilles heel’ of libertarian philosophy with respect to young people is opposition to environmental protection, and that’s exactly where Paul should be challenged. On his website, Paul, who tried to gut the Cross State Air Pollution Rule in 2011, also writes on his website: “By subsidizing certain new energies like solar and wind we distort the marketplace and make it impossible for companies to know what is really the most efficient solution.”
At Media Matters for America Meagan Hatcher-Mays skewers the Wall St. Journal for for shameless distortion in explaining the decline of labor, while ignoring the role of anti-labor court decisions and state legislation. Her article also explains some key reasons behind the erosion of the middle class in the U.S.
Vague poll questions are generally useless from a policy-making point of view, none more so than “Do you think gun control laws should be made more or less strict than they are now?” Down in the fifth graph of this post, however, we get “A HuffPost/YouGov poll conducted in August found that 79 percent of Americans support universal background checks, including for gun shows and private sales.”
Good forum here. The Catholic right is going to have a cow.