Playing in Traffic Is Not Safe Politics

Are Democrats beginning to rationalize that losing the Senate majority wouldn’t be as bad as some fear?

WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 16: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) (C), speaks to the media while flanked by U.S. Sen. Tom Udall (D-CO) (L) and U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), after attending the weekly Senate Democratic policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol July 16, 2013 in Washington, DC. Democrats gathered a the luncheon to discuss their agenda.
National Journal
Charlie Cook
July 7, 2014, 6:33 p.m.

While I have nev­er seen any­one lit­er­ally thrown un­der a bus, I would ima­gine it is quite a grisly sight. In polit­ics, we oc­ca­sion­ally see someone throw an in­di­vidu­al or a group on their own team un­der one. That is not a pretty sight either.

Early this year, we saw Sen­ate Demo­crats throw their House brethren un­der the pro­ver­bi­al bus with a Jan. 29 story in Politico head­lined, “Demo­crats: Cede the House to Save the Sen­ate.” It noted that Demo­crats’ hold on their ma­jor­ity in the up­per cham­ber was tenu­ous, while over on the House side, the Demo­crat­ic Con­gres­sion­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee was rais­ing money hand over fist des­pite hav­ing little chance of re­claim­ing the ma­jor­ity House Demo­crats lost in 2010. It didn’t take a rock­et sci­ent­ist to fig­ure out that Sen­ate Demo­crats were try­ing to re­dir­ect fun­drais­ing from what they saw as a lost cause on one side of the Cap­it­ol to what they saw as a much more im­port­ant one on their side.

On one level, it was pretty ob­vi­ous that the odds were ex­ceed­ingly long for House Demo­crats and more like 50-50 — give or take 10 points — on the Sen­ate side. But these kinds of stor­ies are usu­ally played out in the weeks or fi­nal months be­fore an elec­tion, not in the first month of the elec­tion year. To me, it was both un­der­stand­able and un­seemly, and cer­tainly not very subtle. I could only won­der just how angry House Minor­ity Lead­er Nancy Pelosi was with the story, par­tic­u­larly giv­en that I had heard her de­liv­er a very spir­ited de­fense of Demo­crats’ House chances just a few weeks earli­er. But as the old say­ing goes, “Polit­ics ain’t bean­bag.”

We saw it again this past week with The Wash­ing­ton Post’s in­im­it­able Dana Mil­bank writ­ing a column Ju­ly 4 sug­gest­ing that per­haps the Obama pres­id­ency might be­ne­fit from Demo­crats los­ing their Sen­ate ma­jor­ity. The crunch­ing sound you heard was the bones of Sen­ate Demo­crats un­der a bus, a pretty fair in­dic­a­tion that someone in or close to the White House was be­gin­ning to ra­tion­al­ize why such an out­come might not be as bad a thing as some might think — all lo­gic to the con­trary.

Mil­bank ar­gues, “The pre­vail­ing view is that a Re­pub­lic­an Sen­ate would only com­pound [Pres­id­ent] Obama’s woes by bot­tling up con­firm­a­tions, doub­ling the num­ber of in­vest­ig­a­tions, and chip­ping away at Obama­care and oth­er le­gis­lat­ive achieve­ments.”

Now here comes the bus. Mil­bank con­tin­ues, “Yet there’s a chance that hav­ing an all-Re­pub­lic­an Con­gress would help Obama — and even some White House of­fi­cials have wondered privately wheth­er a uni­fied Re­pub­lic­an Con­gress would be bet­ter than the cur­rent en­vir­on­ment. Re­pub­lic­ans, without Harry Re­id to blame, would own Con­gress — a body that in­spires a high level of con­fid­ence in just 7 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans, ac­cord­ing to a Gal­lup sur­vey last month find­ing Con­gress at a new low and at the bot­tom of all in­sti­tu­tions tested.” Crunch.

All of this re­minds me of a lunch con­ver­sa­tion with a seni­or White House ad­viser just a few weeks be­fore the Demo­crats’ dis­astrous 2010 midterms, when they lost their House ma­jor­ity and saw their Sen­ate edge cut by more than half, los­ing six seats. The ad­viser ap­peared genu­inely dis­in­ter­ested in the midterm elec­tion, seem­ing to only want to talk about which Re­pub­lic­ans might ac­tu­ally jump in­to the 2012 con­test.

To be sure, Obama is run­ning around the coun­try do­ing fun­draisers for the Demo­crat­ic Sen­at­ori­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee, as he does for oth­er party en­tit­ies. But a lot of the good­will built up by do­ing sev­en-di­git fun­drais­ing events is un­done by those in and close to the White House, whose loy­alty seems to be only to The Man and not the best in­terests of the party. Sure, if Re­pub­lic­ans “own” Con­gress, then the Obama White House will have a bet­ter angle of at­tack, but — and you can call me old-fash­ioned — it is nev­er a good thing to lose a Sen­ate or House ma­jor­ity.

That is not to say that Re­pub­lic­ans shouldn’t worry about the pos­sib­il­ity that if they hold the House (highly likely) and win a ma­jor­ity in the Sen­ate, that some of the more exot­ic GOP mem­bers would be em­boldened to do things that could be dis­astrous for their party. That should be a le­git­im­ate con­cern.

But for Obama, while yes, he would be re­cor­ded as the first Afric­an-Amer­ic­an pres­id­ent, he would also be re­membered for hav­ing lost a House ma­jor­ity in his first-term midterm elec­tion and the Sen­ate in his second term — a fairly in­aus­pi­cious re­cord, with the Af­ford­able Care Act cred­ited as hav­ing as­sisted in the play.

What We're Following See More »
LEGACY PLAY
Sanders and Clinton Spar Over … President Obama
10 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama became a surprise topic of contention toward the end of the Democratic debate, as Hillary Clinton reminded viewers that Sanders had challenged the progressive bona fides of President Obama in 2011 and suggested that someone might challenge him from the left. “The kind of criticism that we’ve heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans, I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama,” she said. “Madame Secretary, that is a low blow,” replied Sanders, before getting in another dig during his closing statement: “One of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.”

THE 1%
Sanders’s Appeals to Minorities Still Filtered Through Wall Street Talk
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”

DIRECT APPEAL TO MINORITIES, WOMEN
Clinton Already Pivoting Her Messaging
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.

THE QUESTION
How Many Jobs Would Be Lost Under Bernie Sanders’s Single-Payer System?
19 hours ago
THE ANSWER

More than 11 million, according to Manhattan Institute fellow Yevgeniy Feyman, writing in RealClearPolicy.

Source:
WEEKEND DATA DUMP
State to Release 550 More Clinton Emails on Saturday
19 hours ago
THE LATEST

Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.

Source:
×