By Dave Anderson:
I really don't get the Blue Dogs and the faux deficit hawks.
I really don't get their incentive structure to cover their own ass as their actions seem faulty as hell. I can understand marginal seat Democrats voting to extend the estate tax rate reductions as that is a good way to suck up to their donors. I can understand the desire to slap the dirty fucking hippies who have been right on the major issues of this decade in the face. I can understand those actions despite disagreeing with them on multiple levels.
I don't understand why 38 Democrats defected on the jobs/relief/anti-49 little Hoover Bill that passed the House yesterday. I could understand it if the vote was coming from the left or a pragmatic vote of opposition as the bill is neccessary but insufficient. But that is not the motivation of those Democratic "no" votes. I really don't understand the assumptions required for this to be a good self-preservation vote.
As I see, the biggest danger for any marginal seat Democrat is the national mood and the national objective conditions. The most significant objective condition is the economic situation for the median voter. Next summer as attitudes, engagement and willingness to vote decisions begin to lock in, will people be saying "it's tough out there, but it has been improving lately as seen by Vinny getting a new job, and my hours being extended at work..." or "It sucks right now, but thank god the deficit is only $1.4 trillion dollars instead of $1.5 trillion dollars..."
For a marginal voter who leans Democratic, which statement would be more likely to produce a vote for an incumbent Democrat?
I believe the first statement will get either a marginal but leaning Democratic voter out to the polls, or move a sure voter who could swing to look at the Democrats with less of a jaundiced eye.
No comments:
Post a Comment