About Last Night…

Filed in National by on November 5, 2014

I haven’t blogged about the 2014 election… until now.  Am I disappointed Republicans now control the House and the Senate.  Yes.  Am I devastated?  No.  And here’s why.

Since 2010 the Republican battle cry has been that the House can’t get its crazy past the D controlled Senate.  This worked for them – it was like a constant campaign commercial.  It worked for the so-called “sane” Republicans as well.  Vote to repeal the ACA for the gazillionth time?  Sure.  Why not.  The D controlled Senate would block it and the Rs would get to keep their Conservative street cred while doing nothing.  It’s why there were so many votes taken to repeal the ACA – every Republican wanted a chance (or two, or forty) to go on the record with that meaningless vote.

But now that vote isn’t meaningless, and I’m seeing problems on the horizon.  Given the history, come January the House should vote to repeal the ACA again and send it to the now Republican controlled Senate.  The Senate now has no excuse not to pass it, and there’s a part of me that says let them have their way, mainly because I’m tired of hearing how there’s no difference between the Ds and the Rs.  That line is old and tired.  It’s meaningless, so perhaps it’s time to make it meaningful.  Perhaps it’s time to remind people of the difference.  So maybe, in some strange, wince inducing way this isn’t the end of the world.  The voters (and non-voters) will get to see the Republicans in action, or in non-action, which is more likely.

The debt ceiling vote will come up in March 2015.  How will that work out?  How will kicking millions of people off their health insurance (those with preexisting conditions, kids on their parent’s policies, etc.) work out? Immigration reform is now dead, unless President Obama acts alone – which gives me hope since he’s really done a lot by himself – while Dems cower and mewl bipartisanship.  But don’t worry, I expect impeachment proceedings to begin sooner rather than later.  It’s what Republicans do – it’s one of the only things they do.  And I fully expect a ton of abortion/reproductive rights bills to sail through the House and Senate.  Of course, Republicans won’t have the nerve to make them stand alone bills, they’ll attach the amendments to things like the Federal Budget deal… or the debt ceiling?

Obama will veto these bills, but I’m sure there will be Democrats calling for him to sign off on them, because, ya know, bipartisanship.

And Mitch McConnell shouldn’t get too comfortable.  He’s going to have to deal with Ted Cruz and his band of merry men and women.  He might want to review John Boehner’s past experience to see what he’s in for.  There’s about to be a lot of Republican-on-Republican crime.  That stage is set and I have my popcorn.

I’m really not as pessimistic as I sound.  I’m just weary.  I’m tired of trying to pull Liberal/Progressives out of their constant, angst-y funk.  I’m tired of the “woe is me” whenever things don’t go exactly their way.  And I’m tired of their pretending to be the majority.  They (we) aren’t, and abandoning ship every time they (we) don’t get what they want is self-defeating and one of the main reasons off year election turn-out is so low.  And while I agree that we are a center-left country, we aren’t a left country.  For some reason, certain Liberals/Progressive always seem to forget the “center” part of that description. Why is that?

Last night as Mr. Pandora and I watched the returns I pointed at the TV and said, “This! This is what’s wrong with Democrats!”  What I was talking about is what everyone had been talking about – Alison Lundergan Grimes refusing to say if she voted for Obama.  Of course she voted for Obama.  Why wouldn’t she?  She’s a Democrat.  But instead of just answering the stupid question, she turned what should have been a duh moment into a national story that dogged her every step.  It’s stupid things like this that make me angry.  And it’s behavior like this that explains so much.  It’s as if Democrats decided to follow in Al Gore’s footsteps… and achieved the same results.

True confession:  I had to make myself vote yesterday.  I wasn’t excited.  I felt beaten down and apathetic.  And if I felt that way… how do you think less politically interested voters felt?  Sometimes “faking it until you make it” is sound political strategy.  And maybe losing the Senate is enough to remind everyone exactly what we’re up against, because some people need a reminder.  Hopefully it won’t hurt too much.




About the Author ()

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Comments (52)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jason330 says:

    All due respect, you have my angst-y funk all wrong. I just want Democrats to win and I see the a simple “company culture” and some clear, common sense branding could be a tool to help us win.

    So yes. That the people empowered to come up with some clear common sense branding don’t see it as a valuable tool makes me angsty, angry, pissy, and whatever else you want to attribute to me. Cry baby? Yes. Sure.

    You can say I should go to a meeting, but I could go to 1,000 meetings and if the leaders of the Democratic Party don’t think coherent branding is important those meetings will not amount to JACK SHIT.

  2. Dorian Gray says:

    I’m really trying to care about this. Just can’t muster the feeling. So… control of the filibuster has switched. Can somebody tell me what actual law will be passed at the national level that’ll impact me?

    Don’t get me wrong. I’m no fan of conservative rhetoric. It’s nonsense. But ultimately nothing of any consequence will happen… in Delaware at least.

    This cycle proved (again) that “politics” is about a game. Scorelines. Score more dollars. Get more votes. Do you really thing that pig farmer from Iowa can work in a functioning government? (She did win, right?) Come off it. I’d bet $1,000 right now that she couldn’t locate Donetsk on a map or correctly name the chairperson of the Federal Reserve. And that goes for Democratic candidates as well.

    Is it any shock that based on history the President’s party lost seats in the midterm of his second term. What does it mean? Well, it means the same shit it meant the last several times. It means American’s love re-runs of Gilligan’s Island.

    At the national level at least these people are simply character actors in a terrible reality TV show. Nothing has gotten done and nothing will be done. And this isn’t cynicism. I’m just taking everyone at their word. I didn’t hear anything about any programs or laws anyone was supporting. It’s all anti Obama and generalities.

    Wake me when something actually happens.

  3. Jason330 says:

    Dorian Gray, thank you for the sanity. Do you know where I can buy some?

  4. stan merriman says:

    Jason, I think the truth is that Democrats (DNC and local) do not understand the science and art of branding. As a result, no powerful messaging to imbed it. Republicans have mastered marketing strategy. Democrats….? Making of lists of nice stuff, if they’re communicating at all.

  5. Jason330 says:

    I just posted this to FB – where I tend to be more measured and less hysterical.

    Allow me to be political for a second. Everyone who knows me knows that I’m an old school FDR/JFK Democrat who favors a decent social safety net and a rational progressive tax structure that promotes domestic manufacturing, and basically looks out for the little guy. I like those things because they have a good track record of working. I’m practical.

    So, yes I’m pretty bummed today – but not because Democrats lost. I’m bummed because (except for a few lone eccentrics like Matt Denn, and PA’s new Governor) the Democrats have abandoned that as an identity. What have they taken up instead? Who knows. Voters sure can’t make sense out of it.

  6. Dana says:

    Mr Merriman wrote:

    Jason, I think the truth is that Democrats (DNC and local) do not understand the science and art of branding. As a result, no powerful messaging to imbed it. Republicans have mastered marketing strategy. Democrats….? Making of lists of nice stuff, if they’re communicating at all.

    After election day in 2008 and 2012, Republicans were saying exactly the same thing about themselves.

    Kay Hagan was all I’m-not-Obama, right up until the last couple of days, when the polls showed her with a small lead; then she had President Obama make a commercial for her, and wound up losing by almost 2 percentage points. Then again, the Republican candidates seemed to outperform the opinion polls widely, in Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Georgia and Arkansas; perhaps Senator Hagan was never as ahead as she thought?

  7. TeleMan says:

    So here is my question: Was yesterday in Delaware and nationally a representative sample of the views of the voters, since so few chose to exercise their vote? Turnout in Delaware was an anemic 36%. I don’t know what it was elsewhere. I therefore assume that people essentially voted by not voting, but that has unintended results which I expect we will soon regret. I believe the party matters, and I appreciate that is largely lost on most people. So is that simply a problem of branding?

  8. kavips says:

    And Dana should add 2006 to the above… I remember awaiting those returns and I can understand how Republicans feel today.. Following that 2006-2008 analogy, I predict they win even more in 2016 now. Starting today they have considerable momentum, for they will be the ones all over TV. Dem’s will look cowed, defensive, weak, and pulverized, as did the Republicans from 2006 to 2008….

    Finger pointing is silly. Our electorate has changed…

    Based on the success of their party, we now know the Dems. need to shut down government,( make it over women’s rights). The Dems need to crash the economy by actually lowering the debt ceiling, (make it principled: over lack of higher taxes on the top 1%). With leftover funding, the Dems need to beginning running generic ads stating how the economy has gotten so bad since the Republicans won November 4, 2014…starting today. The Dem’s need to catch up to the Republican’s level of filibustering, to have an equal chance before 2016. The Dems need to start complaining over success, saying that private job growth consistently being over 200,000 per month, is way too high and people need to lose their jobs as soon as possible. The Dem’s Senate needs to hold hearing now between now and January on how the Koch Brothers illegally financed all these campaigns and should be in jail for their crimes to humanity; and no matter what the total evidence may say…, twist it and release only small snippets that are so tasty, a news media outlet can’t refrain from repeating, all of which make the Republicans look far worse than they really are; after all, no one cares about truth or reality anymore.

    All these are how you win elections in today’s world…

    But in total perspective it is not really too much of a surprise… It was the Fox News watchers who came out to vote and even yet the Dem’s came pretty darn close… It would have been nice if Dems. had won, just like it would be nice too if the Eagles could win the Super Bowl, without Foles, but reality is reality.

  9. SussexAnon says:

    People voted for higher minimum wage and legalized weed while changing the Senate to R.
    Figure that one out.

    In 2006 Ds took the Senate. Media claimed it was a major seismic shift and the world would change. It didn’t. R’s lamented it was the end of their world. It wasn’t. These things run in cycles and media just play it up like its a sporting event because thats what they do.

    So keep calm and carry on. And take solace in the fact that northern Delaware is still keeping this state blue. Moderate republican blue, but still blue.

    I welcome the Rs opportunity to “govern” with endless hearings, investigations that lead no where and too convoluted for anyone to understand even if there is wrongdoing while failing to tackle immigration reform (which neither party REALLY wants), healthcare reform, fiscal policy or anything else relatable to the electorate.

  10. SussexAnon says:

    I like Kavips plan. Lets go with that.

    Just as soon as Harry Reid grows a pair.

  11. Jason330 says:

    TeleMan – A PEW survey shows that a large majority of “nonvoters” would vote for the Demcorat if they voted. So, yes. It is a problem with branding. We don’t give the Dem base any reason to get to the polls – so just forget about the apathetic.

  12. SussexAnon says:

    And so it begins……Reid will be minority leader as no one seeks to challenge him.
    Republicans with McConnell? Not so much. Cruz and others are not endorsing him. So there may be a challenge.

    I told you to get popcorn.

    Ron Paul weighs in: “Prepare for more neocon wars.”

  13. Dorian Gray says:

    Stan and Dana are both right. That’s why this is so fucking meaningless. It’s an exercise in Marketing. That’s it. It’s a fad… $4,000,000,000 spent for what? Who picks a candidate based on a fucking bulk mailed flyer or a goddamn yard sign. The more I think about it the more I want to puke.

    You know why politicians can say “I’m not a scientist” when asked about science related policies? Because science is complicated and people don’t care to understand it. People would rather believe that scholars and scientists colluded in some way for some unexplained benefit. We love that stupid conspiracy shit.

    Americans need branding… a slogan. If it can’t be explained in 30 seconds with an explanation that fits a notion the person already holds it’s no good. Make up a story… Even if the story is nonsense. Look at these superhero films everyone flocks to! And these fucking computer games…

    If you hate Obama the economy still sucks. If you’re OK with Obama and really read than you’ll notice that unemployment, growth and deficit reduction figures all paint the president in a good light. The fact that the GOP can basically say… “well, all that progress is fine, but with us it would have been even better!”

    ISIS shits Ebola. GOP ’14! There’s you winning slogan.

  14. Dorian Gray says:

    Get the fucking popcorn, indeed!

  15. John Manifold says:

    “Republicans have mastered contemporary campaigning.”


    So much for the triumphalism of 2012.

  16. Geezer says:

    We’ll see. If you hide your wingnut conservatism from the electorate when you’re running, and get elected when only 40% of that electorate votes, the potential backlash to stealth conservativism could make these Pyrrhic victories.

  17. pandora says:

    I have my popcorn! And Geezer is correct – “If you hide your wingnut conservatism from the electorate when you’re running, and get elected when only 40% of that electorate votes, the potential backlash to stealth conservativism could make these Pyrrhic victories.”

    Which is where I’m at. Let them do as they will since Ds only seem to be motivated by losing. They can’t seem to move the ball down the field toward success. It’s all or nothing with them. We’ll see how that works out.

    One of the reasons I’ve defended Obama is because his flippin’ party never defends him. How’d that work out for them?

  18. pandora says:

    One other thing… anyone who considered Obama 2008 a progressive/liberal was a moron… or should I say moran. 😉

  19. SussexAnon says:

    Ds only fight when they lose. Then they win and…….don’t move the ball for Ds. They immediately go on defense in fear of alienating someone, somewhere.

    Walker and Scott won governorships and wingnutty Rs won elections. Running on wingnuttiness. Crazy GOP policies are not hidden.

    Obama is no progressive/liberal, so get ready for a lot of compromise rhetoric and policy. To which the Republicans will still find unacceptable. Because Ds stop fighting when they win. Rs fight regardless of what their status of victory is

  20. Dana says:

    Mr SA wrote:

    Ds only fight when they lose. Then they win and…….don’t move the ball for Ds. They immediately go on defense in fear of alienating someone, somewhere.

    Yeah, which is why the Patient Protection and Affordable care Act was defeated in Congress, and why the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was never passed. Republicans only wish you were right!

    The thing is that y’all did move the ball, and scored two very big touchdowns. The Republicans won in 2010 by campaigning against the things that you guys actually did, because a lot of voters thought that what the Congress passed wasn’t the right thing to do.

  21. Geezer says:

    No, they voted that way because they are afraid, and their fear is unconquerable.

  22. Geezer says:

    @Pandora: The choice for liberals was between Hillary, whom we suspected would follow her husband’s Third Way course, and Obama, who at least voted against the Iraq war. I didn’t vote for him because I thought he was a liberal. I voted for him because I thought there at least was a possibility he’d be more liberal than Hillary.

  23. SussexAnon says:

    The problem with the ACA and Recovery Act are that Ds ran away from them and didn’t even TRY to sell them.

    That, in a nutshell is the difference between Rs and Ds. Rs will, if that have to, make shit up to make it seem like the turd sandwich they just gave you was a genius idea. See: Iraq war. “Fer’us er agin us, he he he”. Afterwards the sustained propaganda sales job was “well Bush is keepin us safe, why don’t you want to be safe?”

    Ds don’t do that. They/we are too cerebral and can empathize with others. We don’t do propaganda, salesmanship, repeating facts, whatever you want to call it. Rs? Not so much. They are a cannon party. Point the cannon, shoot it and no matter where it lands, craft your message to meet your objective. And everyone in the party says it. Over. And over.

    Ds don’t do message discipline. Rs own it outright.

  24. SussexAnon says:

    In other news: Chip Flowers twists the knife. From Facebook:

    Congrats to Treasurer-Elect Simpler and all the winners in Del. & Mass!


  25. Geezer says:

    Flowers did the most to elect Simpler by acting like a spoiled child throughout his four-year term, so it’s only fitting he offer congratulations.

  26. SussexAnon says:

    Yeah, everyone in the state was all wrapped up in the spoiled child drama. Uh-huh.

    I am sure it didn’t have anything to do with a primary. Funded by the big money backing the party. Not. At. All.

    Ironic that gov. that challenged the status quoe as treasurer takes out the guy that follows him because he challenged the status quoe. It didn’t take much to take Chip out, of course, because he ticked off the bankers. You know, the real power behind the Delaware Democratic party.

    I am sure Chip meant his congratulations in the nicest way possible with no dig at the Democratic party whatsoever.

  27. John Manifold says:

    36 percent turnout. http://delawaregrapevine.com/11-14elex.asp

    Am I the only one who wonders what happened to signage? Not chintzy, annoying road signs on the public right-of-way. I mean billboards. Brenda and Barney were running for billboard offices. They’re young and attractive. They collected lots of money. Might not have just a little bit gone to illuminated billboards? Don’t tell me it went to a well-calibrated turnout operation.

  28. Dominique says:

    No one is going to even attempt to repeal Obamacare, so please unbunch your panties about the poor souls who will supposedly be left without health INSURANCE (let’s please stop with the ‘health care’ nonsense once and for all, shall we?).

    (Quick question: The justification for that behemoth failure was an alleged 40M uninsured who were clamoring for insurance; however, only about 2-3M actually signed up for it when you back out the 5M who actually lost their ‘terrible, horrible, junk policies’ as a result of it. Sooo…where are the other 37M or so suffering souls?)

    I’m predicting the GOP will start fixing the mess your team made, beginning with doing away with the medical device tax. Hopefully, they’ll also put a stop to any insurance company bailout, since I think we can all agree that the insurance companies are the only ones who have actually benefited the most from the law.

    Next they’ll tackle tax reform, immigration (strengthening the border…I know how you HATE the idea of sovereignty, in spite of the fact that every other country – you know, the ones you ALWAYS compare us to in terms of how much we suck – has actual borders that are protected and immigration laws that are enforced), and energy.

    Then the economy will start to grow, the housing market will start to seriously rebound (thank GOD), and lo and behold, the minimum wage will cease to be an issue because, lo and behold, retailers and fast food restaurants will have to pay more to attract employees when people actually have high-paying jobs.

  29. Dominique says:

    That’s a simple economics overview for y’all. I know how much you love to say conservatives don’t believe in science (even tho you ignore a hell of a lot of it yourselves, especially in terms of fetal viability), but it’s become abundantly clear that liberals don’t believe in math. Not sure which one is worse, to be honest.

  30. liberalgeek says:

    Dom – I think part of the 37M people were on the Medicare expansion. Obviously, the active thwarting of that part of the law in red states has had an impact in the number of uninsured in those states.

    More details:


  31. Geezer says:

    What happened? Did someone call the proctologist? What’s this asshole doing here?

  32. Jason330 says:

    Dom – I’m half looking forward to President Ryan. At least all the asinine deficit hysteria will go a while for a while and that should help the economy. (Unless we blow the budget on more wars of course.)

  33. Geezer says:

    @Sussex Anon: The backlash against Barney came from the black community, which saw the attack as race-based. The rest of the state found Chip to be a clown, and also noted that he mopped the floor with Barney in every debate. So I guess it hurt in the sense that it was clear the inferior candidate survived.

    Why would a primary hurt Barney, whose name was otherwise unknown? If he knew how to run for office, it would have helped him.

  34. Geezer says:

    @JM: Nice to see you are focused on the important issues surrounding the race.

    Seriously? You think they would have done better by advertising on billboards? As the resident Democratic Party shill, you brilliantly demonstrate the intellectual bankruptcy of the Delaware Democrats.

  35. John Manifold says:

    Sounds like someone doesn’t know much about advertising.

  36. MikeM2784 says:

    Bullshit. The winds will shift. They always do. It does concern me that they have gerrymandered themselves into a good spot for a while though. Remember, in 2012 more people voted for Democratic house candidates than Republican house candidates, but the Republicans won the house. Demographics in Texas, etc. might be the Democratic salvation against this.

  37. JeremyF says:

    Really? 100-year majority doesn’t mean “Majority lasting one hundred years”; it means “Largest majority during a one hundred year period”. Like a 100-year flood.. It isn’t a flood that lasts 100 years, it is the largest expected flood in a 100 year period.


    For this you should be thankful; even the Republican leadership thinks this is the high water mark! 🙂

  38. Delaware Dem says:

    LOL. If anything the past several elections have proven, the pendulum swings quickly and wildly.

    1992—Dem sweep
    1994—GOP sweep
    1996—Divided gov’t reelected by large margins
    1998—Positive Dem election (pick up seats in both House and Senate)
    2000—Positive Dem election (win popular vote for Presidency and pick up seats in House and Senate)
    2002—Positive GOP election (pick up seats in both House and Senate)
    2004—GOP sweep
    2006—Dem sweep
    2008—Dem sweep
    2010—GOP House sweep
    2012—Divided government reelected (Dems pick up seats in both House and Senate)
    2014—GOP Sweep

    The overwhelming betting money is that the Dems will pick up Senate seats in 2016.

  39. Delaware Dem says:

    Jeremy, then Reince’s math needs some work.

    2014 – 1928 does not equal 100. 😉

  40. JeremyF says:

    Perhaps Reince is actually pessimistic about the GOP’s future and meant ‘for the next 100 years’ 🙂

  41. Linda says:

    Spot on, Pandora.

  42. Truth Teller says:

    Now the true test for President Obama begins does he have the balls to stand up for what he believes or will he fold to the right wing??????

  43. Truth Teller says:

    The Dem’s that won on his coattails in 2008 ran away from him in 2014 so when asked at the press conference what he thought about that he became Mr. Nice instead of saying oh yes and look at where these spineless traitors are today.

  44. jason330 says:

    “Now the true test for President Obama begins does he have the balls to stand up for what he believes or will he fold to the right wing??????”

    Both. He believes in folding to the right wing. (If history is instructive, anyway.)

  45. Terry says:

    TT, it shouldn’t matter what “he” believes; we do not live under a dictatorship.

    Under our Representative Republic, the People are given a voice, and the People spoke loud and clear on Tuesday night; voter turnout, apathy, or whatever other excuse be damned.

  46. Jason330 says:

    Terry, That’s a pretty ridiculous statement. By that measure he should have used his first election mandate to implement single payer health care.

  47. Terry says:

    Yes he could have; the question is why didn’t he?

    Remember, they didn’t need any Republican support to pass it, so why not go for the gusto?

  48. Jason330 says:

    Exactly. So in spite of the results, Republicans should act with similar dignity and decorum. A precedent has been set.

  49. Terry says:

    A precedent that the President folds to the will of the People is a good thing.

    I was simply pointing out to TT that it doesn’t matter what “he (Obama) believes”, he is not a dictator.

  50. Jason330 says:

    Hogwash. It obviously matters what the President believes. This isn’t Switzerland. Mid-term elections are not plebiscites. The President, and all elected officials answer to their conscience first.

  51. Terry says:

    We shall see.