Battle for the Senate: How the GOP Did It

[Michael Hardner]

I'm only part-way through this piece, but it seems to do a good job at the outset of talking about the challenges and responding strategies of both parties to the mid-terms:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/battle-for-the-senate-how-the-gop-did-it/2014/11/04/a8df6f7a-62c7-11e4-bb14-4cfea1e742d5_story.html

Exacerbating matters was Obama’s Oct. 2 speech in Chicago, in which he handed every Republican admaker fresh material that fit perfectly with their message: “I am not on the ballot this fall. . . . But make no mistake — these policies are on the ballot, every single one of them.”

“It took about 12 seconds for every reporter, every race, half of the Obama world to say that was probably not the right thing to say,” said a senior Democratic official. It was so problematic that many Democrats wondered whether Obama meant to say it. He did. “It is amazing that it was in the speech,” the official said. “It wasn’t ad-libbed.”

It was just the kind of unforced error that Republican leaders had worked all year to avoid.

I'd be interested in an apolitical analysis of this analysis. For example, the characteristic of Obama having a disdain for the grit of politics makes sense to me.

[Boges]

Democrats not admitting to voting for Obama was a bad strategy in hindsight eh?

[bush_cheney2004]

Didn't matter...the Republicans got their poop in a group and didn't let extreme candidates get party nomination. Then they ran against President Obama, who is very unpopular these days. Strategists (and PAC money) flew in to save wobbly incumbents. Hope and Change !

Edited November 13, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[Michael Hardner]

It goes to show that the game is still very much open to the smartest player. The adjustments that the Republicans made in 2014, coupled with the Democrat gaffes, were magnificently executed.

[sharkman]

To me it was more than that. Obama's record has been fodder for the republicans because it's been so bad. That the Dems distanced themselves from him tells you all you need to know. Even with the media in their camp they could not overcome that.

[dre]

To me it was more than that. Obama's record has been fodder for the republicans because it's been so bad. That the Dems distanced themselves from him tells you all you need to know. Even with the media in their camp they could not overcome that.

Obama is mediocre. But the senate and house have been REALLY bad, and have had extremely low approval ratings for quite a long time. My guess is that this was the result of garden variety "throw the bums out" sentiment. Americans hate the senate, and since the democrats were in charge they bore the brunt of it.

You have to keep in mind that the US congress is probably the most useless bunch of morons in the history of democracy... They have an approval rating of around 12%. I mean lets face it... you could sodomize a newbord baby on national TV and still be more popular than the American legislative branch.

[sharkman]

That's been the Dem go to line for several years now. Obama may suck, but look at the Congress rating. It's getting pretty old, and a president's job performance directly led to this election result, not the Congress rating. Also, if Congress could spearhead a bill that gets Keystone through, or is a sensible solution to the illegal aliens, the rating would jump overnight.

Oh I know that the left would hate Congress for that, but they already hate them anyway, it's not like the approval rating is gonna go down because dems suddenly disapprove.

[The_Squid]

Obama has been the most significant president in decades.

Cleaning up after the disastrous 8 years of Bush is extraordinary itself.... then there's a medicare plan to cover the uninsured, ending 2 wars, etc, etc. while facing opposition in the worst Congress in American history for much of his term.

History will definitely be kind looking at the Obama presidency.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nope.....Medicaid was extended to include some of the uninsured (not all), another war was started (Libya), and he has a firm down payment going back to Iraq. 'Gitmo ain't gone....drone attacks were expanded.....and the rich got richer. Bush lite.....

[On Guard for Thee]

Obama has been the most significant president in decades.

Cleaning up after the disastrous 8 years of Bush is extraordinary itself.... then there's a medicare plan to cover the uninsured, ending 2 wars, etc, etc. while facing opposition in the worst Congress in American history for much of his term.

History will definitely be kind looking at the Obama presidency.

I would agree. Obama inherited from Bush the "agenda from hell" as it's been called and it seems he hasn't be able to catch a break since. He had a lot of "fires" to put out and at the same time did accomplish some noteworthy achievements, ending wars and establishing health care among them. I think history will be kind to him.

[The_Squid]

I would agree. Obama inherited from Bush the "agenda from hell" as it's been called and it seems he hasn't be able to catch a break since. He had a lot of "fires" to put out and at the same time did accomplish some noteworthy achievements, ending wars and establishing health care among them. I think history will be kind to him.

yes. Very!

I think it's much easier to look at objectively from the outside looking in. And he has been an extremely successful president, all things considered.

Despite bitter opposition, despite having come close to self-inflicted disaster, Obama has emerged as one of the most consequential and, yes, successful presidents in American history. His health reform is imperfect but still a huge step forward – and it's working better than anyone expected. Financial reform fell far short of what should have happened, but it's much more effective than you'd think. Economic management has been half-crippled by Republican obstruction, but has nonetheless been much better than in other advanced countries. And environmental policy is starting to look like it could be a major legacy.

----------------------------------

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/in-defense-of-obama-20141008#ixzz3J5EaF6hW

[sharkman]

Yep, nothing like a love in from a left wing source to praise the empty suit!

[dre]

Yep, nothing like a love in from a left wing source to praise the empty suit!

Like I said... Obama is a mediocre president... But Congress is pretty much universally hated. Thats most likely why their leadership got changed.

[sharkman]

I must have missed that, which Congress leaders were voted out? The Rep. majority did not change, what are you referring too?

[On Guard for Thee]

Yep, nothing like a love in from a left wing source to praise the empty suit!

Oh don't be so jealous. At least Obama doesn't have an empty head. And don't take it personally how hated congress is.

[The_Squid]

Like I said... Obama is a mediocre president... But Congress is pretty much universally hated. Thats most likely why their leadership got changed.

Don't believe the Republican talking points. Obama has been an extremely successful president, given the situation he was handed.

http://t.washingtonmonthly.com/washingtonmonthly/#!/entry/obamas-top-50-accomplishments,51c39c96da27f5d9d0e51bbb/1

[sharkman]

And that's why he lost the Senate, and can't get figure out how to get anything through Congress. Bush, on the other hand, was much worse as he was able to get bills through Congress including TARP, which saved the U.S. economy for Obama.

[On Guard for Thee]

And that's why he lost the Senate, and can't get figure out how to get anything through Congress. Bush, on the other hand, was much worse as he was able to get bills through Congress including TARP, which saved the U.S. economy for Obama.

"Saved the US economy"? Ha ha ha that's ot to be the most absurd statement I've heard in a while.

[ProudCanadianConservative]

The Republicans won because they campaigned against Obama, and Democrats instead of embracing Obama and rallying their own base they hid from Obama because of his low approval ratings. I still think the Republicans would have won if they Democrats did embrace Obama but not by as big a margin, +20 Seats (House & Senate) and + 3 Governors.

The reason why Obama has so low of approval rating is because his two greatest accomplishments have turned into disasters, Obamacare and ending the War in Iraq.

[kimmy]

And that's why he lost the Senate, and can't get figure out how to get anything through Congress. Bush, on the other hand, was much worse as he was able to get bills through Congress including TARP, which saved the U.S. economy for Obama.

Now that the deficit and the unemployment rate are back to where they were before the GlobalEconomicMeltdown, Republican cheerleaders have apparently decided that the economy was fixed all along.

TARP didn't save the economy, TARP saved the banks from falling into the hole they'd dug for themselves. And if there's one thing you could find bipartisan support for in Washington, it's helping out the banks.

-k

[GostHacked]

Now that the deficit and the unemployment rate are back to where they were before the GlobalEconomicMeltdown, Republican cheerleaders have apparently decided that the economy was fixed all along.

TARP didn't save the economy, TARP saved the banks from falling into the hole they'd dug for themselves. And if there's one thing you could find bipartisan support for in Washington, it's helping out the banks.

-k

The only person that we say get a perp walk was Madoff. More heads need to roll before I can take the government seriously at all when they say they want to fix the economy and the financial system. Until then , the incestuous relationship between government and the banks will continue.

[sharkman]

Now that the deficit and the unemployment rate are back to where they were before the GlobalEconomicMeltdown, Republican cheerleaders have apparently decided that the economy was fixed all along.

TARP didn't save the economy, TARP saved the banks from falling into the hole they'd dug for themselves. And if there's one thing you could find bipartisan support for in Washington, it's helping out the banks.

-k

I should have added some kind of sarcasm indication to my post, I was mocking the Squid's idea that Obama has been an extremely successful president by making an outlandish claim regarding Bush. IMO, the employment rates are not close back to normal since millions of people dropped of the rolls and have given up looking for work. The employment participation rates may never get back to pre globaleconomicmeltdown levels.

[Shady]

Now that the deficit and the unemployment rate are back to where they were before the GlobalEconomicMeltdown, Republican cheerleaders have apparently decided that the economy was fixed all along.

TARP didn't save the economy, TARP saved the banks from falling into the hole they'd dug for themselves. And if there's one thing you could find bipartisan support for in Washington, it's helping out the banks.

-k

The deficit isn't back to what it was before 2008. And the unemployment rate is lower because labour participation is at a 35 year low. So their not counted in the unemployment figures. You should know this by now. It's been mentioned several times.

[overthere]

The only person that we say get a perp walk was Madoff. More heads need to roll before I can take the government seriously at all when they say they want to fix the economy and the financial system. Until then , the incestuous relationship between government and the banks will continue.

And lately I hear that the whole subprime lending regime is back in force, banks are again issuing mortgages that CMHC or Genworth would laugh at here. There is still no national requirement to actually qualify for a mortgage.

Here we go again.

As for Obama, I get the impression that he is tired, dispirited and has lost interest. It's a miserable job and miserable life with it.