The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Yes he was a moron but he had an ability to connect with both the base of angry white people and the big money campaign contributors looking for tax cuts or defense spending dollars. The problem now is even if a candidate could unite those two factions, they've dwindled too much to get you over the finish line.

They can still deliver a House majority, though. The Great Dying of hard righties is an existential threat to the knucks, but it proceeds on a glacial time scale. In the meantime, as long as voter suppression measures are upheld by the courts, the Republicans ought to be able to hold on to a large enough bloc in each chamber to sabotage the country, and then turn the anger caused by that inaction into more resentment and more votes form its base. It's a terrible long-term strategy, but at the tactical level it works (kind of).

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Ryan may want to rethink becoming Speaker.

Earlier this week, Boehner and other GOP leaders were prepared to start the inevitable game of legislative volleyball with the Senate: They would put a bill on the floor as soon as Friday that would raise the debt ceiling through early 2017, plus make sweeping changes to the annual congressional budget process.

That proposal, dubbed the “Terms of Credit Act,” bore the imprimatur of the Republican Study Committee and appeared to be an ideal conservative starting point for demanding concessions as a condition of extending the nation’s borrowing authority — before Republicans would ultimately have to swallow a “clean” bill.

However, a whip count Wednesday night showed the RSC measure didn’t have the GOP votes to proceed.

That's bad news, folks.

[Rover]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

They can still deliver a House majority, though. The Great Dying of hard righties is an existential threat to the knucks, but it proceeds on a glacial time scale. In the meantime, as long as voter suppression measures are upheld by the courts, the Republicans ought to be able to hold on to a large enough bloc in each chamber to sabotage the country, and then turn the anger caused by that inaction into more resentment and more votes form its base. It's a terrible long-term strategy, but at the tactical level it works (kind of).

Regarding the House, Dems need to play hardball. States of Florida, Ohio, and Michigan allow for citizens ballot initiatives. Put question on ballot in time for 2016 general election to take redisctricting out of partisan hands and into independent commission. Lawsuit in FL has thus far been successful. Keep pursuing VA and TX ones. Netting a seat or two here and there is crucial, given that there's 26 Goopers sitting in Obama seats in a 30 seat majority.

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Regarding the House, Dems need to play hardball. States of Florida, Ohio, and Michigan allow for citizens ballot initiatives. Put question on ballot in time for 2016 general election to take redisctricting out of partisan hands and into independent commission. Lawsuit in FL has thus far been successful. Keep pursuing VA and TX ones. Netting a seat or two here and there is crucial, given that there's 26 Goopers sitting in Obama seats in a 30 seat majority.

None of it matters of we don't capture state legs. I wish we had non-partisan district drawing in every state, but in the short term at least it's foolish to pin all our hopes on what is a very slow, politically vicious, trudge through blood and quicksand.

Here is the composition of current legs.

Here are the 2016 swing states:

NV: straight R
CO: Split, D adv
IA: Split, R adv
OH: Straight R
VA: Split, no adv
FL: Straight R
NH: Split, no adv

Bad news for the good guys. Overall it's even worse. In state legs, R controls 30, D controls 11, the rest are split. That's a huge systemic advantage for the bad guys when it comes time to draw districts, and it results in stuff like the Democrats having a one million vote advantage in Congressional elections in 2014 and still being a voiceless minority in the House. Likewise R has 31 governorships, and we've seen how that is shortening the Dem bench both for president and also Senate races.

[Handyman]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

You're shortchanging W's political skills. Yes he was a moron but he had an ability to connect with both the base of angry white people and the big money campaign contributors looking for tax cuts or defense spending dollars. The problem now is even if a candidate could unite those two factions, they've dwindled too much to get you over the finish line.

Not to mention, he had the Xtians believing he was a godfearing bible thumper despite being a coked out partier. The man could play the game...

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Not to mention, he had the Xtians believing he was a godfearing bible thumper despite being a coked out partier. The man could play the game...

None of that was him. It was all turd blossom.

[Handyman]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

None of that was him. It was all turd blossom.

While that is true, Rubio has none of that. Rubio is a darker skinned Scott Walker who is a bit less of a mouth breather. He will get trounced.

[unofan]

None of it matters of we don't capture state legs. I wish we had non-partisan district drawing in every state, but in the short term at least it's foolish to pin all our hopes on what is a very slow, politically vicious, trudge through blood and quicksand.

Here is the composition of current legs.

Here are the 2016 swing states:

NV: straight R
CO: Split, D adv
IA: Split, R adv
OH: Straight R
VA: Split, no adv
FL: Straight R
NH: Split, no adv

Bad news for the good guys. Overall it's even worse. In state legs, R controls 30, D controls 11, the rest are split. That's a huge systemic advantage for the bad guys when it comes time to draw districts, and it results in stuff like the Democrats having a one million vote advantage in Congressional elections in 2014 and still being a voiceless minority in the House. Likewise R has 31 governorships, and we've seen how that is shortening the Dem bench both for president and also Senate races.

In fairness, lots of states have only 1-2 seats, so it's tough to gerrymander any of those. Who cares if the Wyomings of the world are deep red?

[Rover]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

In fairness, lots of states have only 1-2 seats, so it's tough to gerrymander any of those. Who cares if the Wyomings of the world are deep red?

A couple of follow up points:

1) I completely agree that Dems need to do a better job on a statewide level in several places. In certain states I don't think there's a structural problem and would expect a bounceback. Remember how Tim Pawlenty was supposed to turn Minny red after his two terms? So, states like WI, MI, NV I'd expect to bounce back. I share the concern about a place like Florida where the state party seems atrocious and has been for years, no small wonder given that it yielded the world Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

2) Having said that, my proposal (well, I didn't come up with it) eliminates the wait for a 10 year state legislature reclamation project to bear fruit. Already states like CA, AZ, IA have independent commissions. The easiest way to get more is a ballot initiative. Lets get that done, pronto.

3) Lastly to uno's point, we're not talking that many states. One, two and even 3 district states really don't lend themselves to too much mischief. ME, NH, VT, RI, DE, ND, SD, KS, NE, MT, WY, ID, HI, NM, AK, WVA = 16 states where this is irrelevant. Of the remaining states AZ, CA, IA, NJ and WA have an independent process to some extent. In addition Florida has a law that incumbent protection can't factor into drawing the lines. So, lets pick and choose our battles (and in fairness Goopers should be pushing for this in Illinois). Really you're after 5 states (PA, WI, MI, OH, VA) to start with.

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

In fairness, lots of states have only 1-2 seats, so it's tough to gerrymander any of those. Who cares if the Wyomings of the world are deep red?

True

[St. Clown]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

A couple of follow up points:

1) ...Remember how Tim Pawlenty was supposed to turn Minny red after his two terms?

It wasn't just T-Paw that was influencing that idea within Minnesota. At that point, we'd had two terms of Arnie Carlson (R), then Jesse "The Governor" Ventura (I), and then Tim Pawlenty for two terms. By the end of Pawlenty's second term, it had been twenty years since our last DFL governor - Rudy Perpich.

[Kepler]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

A couple of follow up points:

1) I completely agree that Dems need to do a better job on a statewide level in several places. In certain states I don't think there's a structural problem and would expect a bounceback. Remember how Tim Pawlenty was supposed to turn Minny red after his two terms? So, states like WI, MI, NV I'd expect to bounce back. I share the concern about a place like Florida where the state party seems atrocious and has been for years, no small wonder given that it yielded the world Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

2) Having said that, my proposal (well, I didn't come up with it) eliminates the wait for a 10 year state legislature reclamation project to bear fruit. Already states like CA, AZ, IA have independent commissions. The easiest way to get more is a ballot initiative. Lets get that done, pronto.

3) Lastly to uno's point, we're not talking that many states. One, two and even 3 district states really don't lend themselves to too much mischief. ME, NH, VT, RI, DE, ND, SD, KS, NE, MT, WY, ID, HI, NM, AK, WVA = 16 states where this is irrelevant. Of the remaining states AZ, CA, IA, NJ and WA have an independent process to some extent. In addition Florida has a law that incumbent protection can't factor into drawing the lines. So, lets pick and choose our battles (and in fairness Goopers should be pushing for this in Illinois). Really you're after 5 states (PA, WI, MI, OH, VA) to start with.

All good points.

Speaking of dirty tricks, whatever happened to that GOP scam where they were trying to get Dem stronghold states to go to proportional representation of EV while keeping their red states as winner-take-all?

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

It wasn't just T-Paw that was influencing that idea within Minnesota. At that point, we'd had two terms of Arnie Carlson (R), then Jesse "The Governor" Ventura (I), and then Tim Pawlenty for two terms. By the end of Pawlenty's second term, it had been twenty years since our last DFL governor - Rudy Perpich.

Yeah, but tell the rest of the story. How the GOP had gotten elected and controlled both houses and they used their entire political capital on trying to get an amendment to the Constitution banning gay marriage. It failed. If I remember right there was one other social issue that year as well and it also failed.

Then they lost their majorities.

Same thing the clowns are pulling in Washington.

[St. Clown]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Yeah, but tell the rest of the story. How the GOP had gotten elected and controlled both houses and they used their entire political capital on trying to get an amendment to the Constitution banning gay marriage. It failed. If I remember right there was one other social issue that year as well and it also failed.

Then they lost their majorities.

Same thing the clowns are pulling in Washington.

The state house and senate Republicans pushed their agendas after Pawlenty's second term ended, early into Dayton's first term in office. The two items were banning same-sex marriage and creating a voter ID law. Both items failed, the SSM issue went down hard while the voter ID issue was pretty close, IIRC. Still, that caused the Republicans to lose their opposition power and, I believe, secured Dayton his second term in office.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

The state house and senate Republicans pushed their agendas after Pawlenty's second term ended, early into Dayton's first term in office. The two items were banning same-sex marriage and creating a voter ID law. Both items failed, the SSM issue went down hard while the voter ID issue was pretty close, IIRC. Still, that caused the Republicans to lose their opposition power and, I believe, secured Dayton his second term in office.

So, to continue the discussion. When Republicans gain power they never really work on the fiscal issues at all. They work on what gets them elected. Which is the 20% minority that pushes social agenda issues like Voter ID and Gay Marriage.

And this doesn't just happen in Minnesota. Voter ID issues are on ballots all over the country. And the amount of Abortion legislation that's worked on and passed by GOP Houses across the country is staggering.

This is why they have lost the popular vote 5 out of the last 6 Presidential elections. If it wasn't for Gerry Mandering they may not have any power at all.