8.25.2009

Majority Leader Dick Durbin?

The Democrats may be steadily losing ground in the generic congressional ballot, and may either break even or suffer a net loss of a seat or two in the Senate next year. But there's little reason to suspect right now that they will lose majority control of either chamber.

But they may lose their Senate Majority Leader, Nevada's Harry Reid. As Nate noted in his latest Senate rankings--despite lots of cash on hand for Reid, Nate rates Reid's seat fourth most likely to change partisan hands--Reid is trailing some relatively obscure Republicans. (It should be noted for non-NCAA basketball fans, however, that Republican candidate Danny Tarkanian, the son of former UNLV head coach Jerry Tarkanian who leads Reid by 11 points in the latest poll, has the benefit of some built-in name recognition in the state.)

Ed Morrissey raises some interesting questions after reminding us that Reid...

...would be the second Democratic Senate Majority Leader in a row to get thrown out of office by his own constituents (Tom Daschle got a compulsory retirement from South Dakotans), and he can’t allow that to happen by default with a retirement. The embarrassment would permanently damage the Democratic agenda in the Senate and take what little luster remains of the Obama administration. The Democrats have to fight for Reid, which makes the stakes even higher for them-—and the embarrassment even worse if he loses.

Will Reid try to save himself by retreating on ObamaCare and cap-and-trade? Normally I’d guess yes, but I’m not sure that Reid will get the luxury of listening to his constituents. If he wants a big Democratic Party rescue, he’ll need the national interests pushing for both big agenda items, especially the unions and the hard-Left organizers. Without them, he’s sunk, big warchest or not. Also, he’s probably boxed into the Obama agenda thanks to his actions this year and the yoke he shares with Nancy Pelosi and Obama. It’s probably too late to salvage independents in Nevada already.

What happens if Reid loses? Dick Durbin (D-IL) would almost certainly take the helm from Reid, which may not be a good outcome for either Republicans or Democrats. Nevadans apparently believe that they can get addition through subtraction, however, and Reid looks likely to exit after 2010, barring some electoral miracle in his state—-a very expensive miracle that might soak up all of the money needed to fight other midterm battles.

Obviously, the big problem for Reid is that he is majority leader, which means he doesn't have the benefit of political cover from national trends, or any disappointment or disapproval of the Obama Administration. The former boxer is trapped in the corner of the ring by his prominent position.

But in my view, precisely because he can't duck or run like a Ben Nelson or Mary Landrieu, Reid may as well be more aggressive as a national leader, whether on health care or other issues. Otherwise, he looks like a weak leader relative to his fellow Democratic president and the Senate Democrats he leads. Conservatives, who are delighting in the new poll numbers and calling for his head, aren't going to vote for him anyway, so he can't afford to lose Democrats and independents by appearing soft.

A bit of toughness from the former pugilist, coupled with that huge cash advantage and support from unions and national organizations and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee resources, ought to be enough to save his seat. Whether he should, or would want to, remain majority leader after that is another matter.

45 comments

PeteKent said...

Reid is toast. But do we really need another far-left wing Chicago crook at the heights of power?

I mean, doesn't Obama suck enough on his own?

petekent01 (on twitter)

PeteKent said...

Tom,

If Reid loses do you think it will be based on racism?

petekent01 (on twitter)

nkpolitics1279 said...

Durbin is from Springfield. He is a protege of the late Paul Simon.
That will likely make Chuck Schumer- Democratic Whip.

platanoman said...

Oh here we go with trolls like Peter Kent. But, I would wait and see with Harry Reid. I am not counting the guy out so early in the game.

PeteKent said...

Chuck Shumer is a pinko radical who feeds off the trough of Wall Street. We are going from bad to worse.

Don't be fooled: Obama and the Dems are corporatists. They want to promote the economic interests of their allies like Goldman Sachs (who will make billions on Cap and TRADE). Their economics are much more those of Hitler than Marx and Lenin, although it is all just a stepping stone to more and more government control.

So many were willing to march like sheep to the gas chambers.

Thank goodness for Facebook and two words: DEATH PANELS!

How gallin it must be to the Left that Sarah Palin is taking down their pet project and she did it with a blog post!

Obama cannot thwart such risable opposition as Sarah Palin. He really sucks at being President.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Persuter said...

Reid is toast. But do we really need another far-left wing Chicago crook at the heights of power?

As nk said, he's not a "Chicago" crook in any way, shape, or form. You simply spew half-baked invective at anyone with a (D) next to their name.

Patapsco Jones said...

Don't feed that troll folks, he ties his own noose tighter with every letter he types.

I for one will not miss Harry Reid, who I think virtually anyone would be an improvement over. However I would much prefer Schumer to be the new Leader if Reid goes down. He is simply much better on TV than Durbin and that is Job #1 for the Senate Leader.

Quixote said...

Embarassing to Democrats to retire him? At least it's a one-off rather than the ongoing embarassment of his leadership.

Sacto Joe said...

You know, there's been a lot of hype about how the far left is abandoning Obama because he's too far to the right. And yet here's Peter Kent saying things like "doesn't Obama suck enough on his own?".

I'm convinced that a goodly number of so-called left-wing posters on this site and elsewhere are in fact right wing posters trying to drive a wedge between the Democrats. I don't put anything past the Right Wing Propaganda Machine!

murphro2 said...

The last part of your article is perhaps the most instructive. At this point, given how he's failed to lead much at all, there are not many rank and file Dems who would be all that sad if the Senate had new leadership. It would look bad for the Dems temporarily, and much would be made of it in the news, but right now the GOPer's misinformation machine's greatest ally is Reid's hemming and hawing.

That said, 2010 is still a while away and much could happen. Indeed, why not find a spine and be more decisive? The opposite is clearly not working for him. Also, weaker candidates have remained in office, so his fate is far from decided.

Perhaps all this doomsaying will put some backbone into more Dems to get things done rather than looking scared so much of the time.

Alex S. said...

First, the Republicans have to find a credible challenger, there is none so far. Then you have to take Reid's financial advantage into account. Additionally, Reid can take credit for killing Yucca Mountain. Then you have to take into account that the recent Mason-Dixon poll uses a strict likely voter-model that does not take the most recent changes in party affiliation into account. And Mason-Dixon has a bit of a Republican house-effect in general. And then I also have to think back of exactly 12 months ago, when McCain was half a percent ahead in the polls and suddenly the world seemed to end, just because the Republicans yelled the loudest during August.
I also think that Reid is too soft as a majority leader, but I can't see him losing and I also think that the Democrats will be in a better position at the midterms than they are right now. The economy will have left the recession by then, although the problem of unemployment and the ripple effects (foreclosures, deficit) remain.

Mike said...

This is still purely mastorbatory.

I mean come on 16 months before 2008 Obama has no chance, we were looking at president Guliani, KY was not even close to credible race and neither was MN.

To project results 16 months in advance is impossible and pure guess work.

There are too many unknowns, wake me when we get to 2010

Paul said...

As a former intern for Dick Durbin, I would love to see him as Senate Majority Leader. Harry Reid is driving me crazy, and a blue-state Democrat like Durbin with a solid progressive track record would do so much more for the Democratic agenda and making President Obama succeed. Please, Harry ... Retire, will ya?

DSM said...

This doesn't really explain why Durbin being Majority Leader would be bad. Durbin was re-elected last fall with 67% and resides in a more safely Democratic state than South Dakota or Nevada. Other than the embarrassment of Reid losing, Durbin becoming Majority Leader is a good situation for Democrats.

markymark said...

I wonder if Durbin might decide not to be SML with another Illinoisian in the White House? Has a state ever had such a high ranking congressional figure and President at the same time? It would be a big step to make. Schumer would make a pretty good leader as well.

Larry said...

Senator Reid has demonstrated 'time and time' again that he is the secret weapon of the Republican's. This speaks volumes of the Democratic majority who elected him. It also lays bare how little progressive values remain in the Democratic majority who like their Republican colleagues repeatedly compromise the ' General Good ' for what lobbyists and other special interests want. It is a sad day for the country when our Congressional reps pimp themselves out to the needs of corporations and their lobbyists at the expense of the broader electorate whose votes put them in office.

Jeff Sand said...

Speaking as an Illinoisan who has voted for Durbin the last two times, and supported his first Senate campaign way back in high school, I remain unconvinced that he would be as much as an improvent over Reid as many of you think he would.

Durbin may be playing from a safer position in Illinois, but he's shown tenancies of being just as waffly as Reid. I remind you of the incident way back in 2005 where Durbin was talking about Gitmo and made some references to Soviets, Nazis, and other regimes and how they treated their prisoners. Republicans, as expected, cried foul, and Durbin almost immediately went into a Glen Bleck-style crying apology on the Senate floor. I unfortunately can't find video, but here's the transcript: http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=239278

Rule #1 folks, there is no crying in the Senate. If you want to be the majority leader, there is to be wimpering like a lapdog to the minority. I offer you that Durbin, while well-connected and progressive on the issues, possesses neither the backbone nor the resolve to get the job done. There are better choices.

If you want party machine, go with Schumer. Or to try and appease appalachia, Rockefeller. Or Mikulski, if she doesn't retire. I honestly think Hillary Clinton would have been a good choice. If nothing else, she would have at least fought tooth and nail and not surrendered to Republicans.

ytownMetz said...

GOP only winning 2 seats in the Senate??? LOL the PPP Pollster, a Democratic may I add, suggest the GOP has a shot at winning 9 seats from the Dems.. Go look at his blog!

Reid-Dodd-Specter are going to be toast in a repeat of 1994.

KIC said...

Wow. PeteKent is really really bored today.

PeteKent said...

No Democrat in IL can advance without the whole hearted backing of the Chicago Machine. Where do you think the votes come from?

With so many IL politicans in jail or under indictment doesnt it strain credulity to be believe Durbin and Obama are clean.

In Obama's case we know he came out of the corrupt Blago machine where quid pro quo was Latin for "Cough it up!". And his best freind was Tony Rezko, a convicted felon who he worked for as a lawyer and whom he used as intermediary for a sweetheart real estate deal.

Obama sez he's clean, but his background is against him.

Besides, he sucks at being President. He can't even convince the people of the manifest benefits of healthcare access for all.

Pathetic.

petekent01 (on twitter)

Cugel said...

I honestly think that Democrats like Reid have a secret death wish.

The dynamics are so completely clear.

1. All Republicans are committed 100% to total destruction of the Obama administration and their own rise back to power. There is NO SUCH THING as bi-partisanship and all attempts to produce it are futile and self-defeating.

2. There's NO point trying to appease the right-wing. Conservatives will NOT vote for him in 2010. All he can do is try to get as progressive a bill through Congress as possible so that the middle class won't be screwed -- i.e. a requirement that working and middle class people buy health insurance WITHOUT funding to support it, backed by "tax cuts" that people who aren't earning enough to pay the taxes won't benefit from.

None of that will be wildly popular with anybody. '

3. Republicans will respond to this predictable fiasco by screaming "see!" We told you government health care wouldn't work!" When THEY were the REASON why a decent health care bill that the middle class would actually LIKE didn't pass!

They first BLOCK health care reform that would help ordinary people and then take credit.

Reid's ONLY chance is to produce as strong a bill as possible. But, you don't see him fighting for it. It's all "bi-partisan" business as usual.

It's all rather like watching a drowning victim debating whether to swim as hard as possible or just let themselves sink and hope somehow that a miracle will float them to the surface!

booger said...

You think the Dems will lose only one or two seats? You just can't see what's coming.

Brian said...

What about Majority Leader Schumer? I think he'd be the best at it.

Todd Luvs Loungin' said...

I feel Harry has a lot of things going for him. Most of all, the Democrats still have a 50,000 voter registration lead over Cons/Libertarians thanks to Obama in 2008. Harry just has to convince Obama voters that a vote for Harry is a vote for Obama. After all, Obama won 55% to 42% in 2008. 2009 was always going to be tough for the Democrats. They are working hard if not very smart, but I feel 2010 will be better. Let's not forget the stimulus will really be felt around March through July.

2008 feels like a defining election where the demographics has really shifted to the Democrats.

Jason said...

Could Durbin win the job? Senators LIKE a weak majority leader. I don't think it's a coincidence that the last two have had vulnerable seats. That's a feature, not a bug. If I'm a senator, and I'm primarily concerned with maintaining my own independence, the last thing I want is a senate leader from a safe seat. No, I want a guy who's always a hair's breadth from defeat at the ballot box. I want a leader whose footing is so shaky that he doesn't have any ability to push me around.

dsalkovi said...

If PK had a clue he would know that the supposed "Chicago Machine" was *not* supportive of Obama when he became a public figure. Try, just try to deal with facts, sport. You might look at who he ran against for starters.

Your lies reflect your upbringing. Seriously.

alan said...

Other than Rasmussen, virtually all other generic-ballot measurements have the Democrats in the lead. The polls consistently show large percentages undecided, but it is, after all, a long way until the 2010 House elections.

Mule Rider said...

I'm convinced that a goodly number of so-called left-wing posters on this site and elsewhere are in fact right wing posters trying to drive a wedge between the Democrats. I don't put anything past the Right Wing Propaganda Machine!

Ah, the paranoia of the Left gives me a hearty chuckle quite regularly.

Josh said...

Could Durbin win the job? Senators LIKE a weak majority leader. I don't think it's a coincidence that the last two have had vulnerable seats. That's a feature, not a bug. If I'm a senator, and I'm primarily concerned with maintaining my own independence, the last thing I want is a senate leader from a safe seat. No, I want a guy who's always a hair's breadth from defeat at the ballot box. I want a leader whose footing is so shaky that he doesn't have any ability to push me around.

Maybe there is something to this. But it's also worth noting that one of the reasons Reid and Daschle have been relatively vulnerable is that they're Dems who represent more moderate or conservative constituencies.

Maybe this isn't a coincidence. Maybe the Blue Dog types in the Senate have enough clout to ensure that a hardcore liberal like Schumer doesn't get elected majority/minority leader.

goldkngt55 said...

Well speaking as an Obama supporter and as someone who considers the Republican or Libertarian parties functionally useless in their modern incarnations, I will happily send money to ANYONE who can get at least within 5% points in most of the polls, because Harry Reid is an absolutely spineless weasel.

Michael said...

Ed Morissey doesn't seem credible, given this propaganda bullshit:

"Will Reid try to save himself by retreating on ObamaCare and cap-and-trade? Normally I’d guess yes, but I’m not sure that Reid will get the luxury of listening to his constituents."

What's his evidence that Reid's constituents don't want guaranteed national health insurance and want the weather to be even hotter and drier in Nevada? I have trouble paying attention to anything else that Morissey says about politics after reading such conventional willful ignorance, or worse.

CO-Liberal said...

We watched Reid cower to the Republicans between 2006-2008, using the pathetic line of defense: "We don't have 60 votes".

In 2009, with 60 votes and an overwhelming mandate, Reid is still cowering to the Republicans.

I'll be glad to see the career of this sad excuse for a Democrat come to an end.

Mark said...

The latest poll on Reid and his possible Repub. opponents was done by Mason-Dixon for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. The Review-Journal is a right-wing rag and Mason-Dixon skews to the right. Just before the Presidential election it had Obama up +4 in Nevada; he won by well over 12%.

Cor said...

Reid and Pelosi were both Bush enablers and week leaders who goose stepped in sync as our nation lost its global prestige, manufacturing base, fiscal responsibility, went in to two ill considered wars, and did nothing as our economy went down the drain. Good riddance. Though I can't say I have much faith in more effectual leadership as both our political parties are endemically corrupt an beholden to corporate interests and are more interested in re-election and their post political careers then they are with doing what is right for their constituents.

Bill R. said...

Schumer! He has spine, and will lead, and with authority. He understands the exercise of power.

Gyrate said...

Left-leaning independent here.

I don't know the contenders well enough to offer an opinion on potential replacements but I would not be sad to see Reid (and Pelosi) go. If you're going to be a "leader", lead, dammit! The Dems need to grow a collective spine, and they need a leader who has one too.

PeteKent said...

Obama bought his house through Tony Rezko. Obama is deep into it with the corrupt Chicago machine. I cant say if they supported him at first. i do know that one of Obama's political mentors was terrorist Bill Ayers. Nice history this sucka has!

RIP Ted Kennedy - The World and the Senate will be a Better Place wihout You! May flights of Angels sing thee to thy rest!

petekent01 (on twitter)

BlackSocialistDemocrat said...

Every Democrat that wants true reform should hope for the defeat of Harry Reid. His spinelessness is brought into even greater contrast by the passing of Ted Kennedy and has provided constant succor to the Repugs. I believe that one of the main weaknesses of Liberals is our inability to take the generational view. We seems to wait for one charismatic leader after another and lose our minds when he doesn't give us everything we want immediately while the Repugs concentrate on building and maintaining the political infrastructure that forwards their agenda. The congress is the key Obama will sign anything that congress sends him so lets increase our progressive majority. Is it really reasonable to expect Obama to be able to do everything we want in 8 months the entire U.S. government aided and abetted the Bush Crime family for eight years!

Roll'nontheriver said...

I don't think I agree with Mr. Morrissey's view that, "The embarrassment would permanently damage the Democratic agenda in the Senate and take what little luster remains of the Obama administration." I think much of the blame for the perceived "failures" so far fall squarely on the ineffective leadership in Congress - especially in the Senate. I think ditching Reid would give the Democrats a bit of a fresh slate. Make him the scapegoat (which he probably deserves) and change tack.

I have long felt that Reid is a terrible tactician. His underlying ideas might be good but you would never know it because he consistently says the wrong thing at the precisely wrong time, concedes where he should fight, and fights where he should concede. His ill-considered rhetoric, guarantees, and proclamations invariably throw Republican strategists’ verbal life-lines just as they are about to sink. He is his own (and the Democratic party's own) worst enemy. I say good riddance if he gets tossed.

As for the trolls...really guys, where the hell does the cockiness come from? You're like the football player who dances, struts, and points when he scores the meaningless 4th-quarter touchdown after his team just got trounced by 21 points. You are probably the same folks who proclaimed with absolute certainty and arrogance that "Obama can NEVER win". You guys just go right ahead and keep on underestimating him. I assume at some point you will tire of being proven wrong time and time again. Then again, you probably still listen raptly to Bill Kristol and Dick Morris so maybe serial "wrongness" doesn't affect your thinking at all.

Groupthink Fighter said...

I am seriously considering creating a DumpReid PAC. A powerless junior Republican Senator to join the disgraced Ensign is FAR preferable than a weak Democrat with power.

I consider "Weak-Kneed" Reid to be a tremendous problem for successful implementation of positive domestic policy. He actually allows the minority party dictate the Senate's agenda. Unacceptable! He has a weak grasp of foreign policy to boot.

Until he requires the Republicans to get out the cots and follow-through on their threatened filibuster... he does not deserve continued leadership.

Greg Siskind said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Jim said...

Harry is virtually useless so he won't be missed too much,but Durbin? Just another Illinois lightweight, just like Obama. They talk a good game but are short on follow through. When will we ever learn?

goldkngt55 said...

A light weight is still better than a feather weight.

Down with Harry Reid.

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,

,

tariely said...

центрифугат зеленый лазер шагнуть
Электронная почта без регистрации