![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
I'm not sure I'm comfortable with this. If Webb (D-VA) and Tester (D-MT) hold their leads, then the senate will consist of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, an independent who will definitely vote with the Democrats on basically everything (Sanders, I-VT), and Joe Lieberman. Therefore, Joe Lieberman will essentially be the second most powerful person in America. Lots of bills, leadership of committees, and so on will depend entirely on his swing vote.
no subject
I agree that expanding the defintion of Dem is good. It's copying the Rs who, ideologically, have absolutely been the big tent party. I just don't agree that those Rs will defect. If they've stayed R so far I think they're sticking it out. MAYBE if the Rs continue to pull off to the right (but how can it get further right, really? Look at the leadership! Brownback a serious presidential contender? Moderate Rs (Romney, Pataki) trying to impress the right with out of character moves? I think (compared to the independent Rs) it's pretty extreme already) they'd defect. I guess also maybe if defect+D power=cushy committee position they could be persuaded, but I think that would take a serious dismantaling of the R Party and those few defectors would probably be the least of the problems! Yes, the Rs are a mess, but they lost very close races. The micro-targeting has always been a high risk game and it went their way (helped enormously by D ineptitude) for several cycles. This isn't a unified mandate like in 1994. They have a divided government for at least two years? That was business as usual (on and off) for DECADES, I don't think it is an overwhelming rebuke. Now they just have to run things like most other administrations. Absolute power, etc.
I think your take on the abortion discussion is overly optimistic. I don't think pro life Ds (or pro choice Rs, together a sizeable number) will vote for anti abortion bills, but the discussion of abstinence and contraception is NOT POSITIVE. Whether the Ds are pivoting from abortion to a more inclusive issue as you suggest or responding to the crazy right wing discussion about contraception being part of abortion I think contraception being part of or in any way connected to or even up for discussion about legislation at this point is an extraordinary step backward!! I recognize that things like funding for sex ed and medicaid for contraception do come up for votes and are ways for pro life Ds to empower women, BUT that is not all that this discussion is about now. It's about if contraception is even ok and, no, I'm not super excited for someone to be like "hmm...yeah, sure, I think contraception is ok." It should be automatic, and it largely was up till a few years ago.
Anyway. I also disagree that the country is, or is even leaning conservative. Gay marriage and abortion as example are wedge issues. If Ds adequately explained their stances on the social and economic issues that actually IMPACT those people they'd be overwhelmingly D! (and when polled on the issues they do NOT answer conservatively) This is also going to deter the independent Rs because they may be pro choice, but maybe they favor business on economic issues. They are not Ds for a reason. And I think those gay marriage votes also make it clear that voters do not (fully) connect gay marriage ban with anti D since Ds won in those gay marriage states so there is no reason for the independent Rs to defect. Rs don't need to be Ds to say "hey we aren't crazy conservatives."
And I don't think Ds EVER thought they needed to be Rs to prove "hey we aren't crazy liberals," but hey, at least now that is crystal clear. (Senate leader is a pretty conservative D, though everyone worships Clinton he is a true centerist and a lot of his friends (RAHM) remain in high places, and those "crazy liberals" are rarely very far left and almost never "crazy liberals.")
Ok, I could keep rambling, but I'll stop. Email or something if you'd like to continue.
no subject
No, no, carry on! Maybe by listening to y'all I'll actually learn enough to participate in this sort of discussion. I get most of my dem info from Daily Kos, which (by design) is much more focused on campaining and election strategy than on actual governing. Consequently, I have much less of a sense of what will happen next than perhaps I should.