• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 11:43PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)

Over There

Tom Hayden on the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement and the fate of Iraq's detainees.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 11:07PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (14)

Another Mystery

Have you ever seen this guy before?

His name is Mike Duncan.

He's the head of the Republican party, chairman of the RNC.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 5:23PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)

TPMtv: The Day in 100 Seconds

--David Kurtz

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 4:08PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (21)

The Abiding Mystery Pt. 4

From TPM Reader JB, a former GOP Hill staffer who's moved on to greener pastures ...

How many Congressional Republicans had political identities distinct from that of President Bush, while Bush was still popular among Republican voters?

The answer to this question -- awfully damned few -- is a big reason why the Republican setbacks in the 2006 election cycle were followed by more setbacks in 2008. For years, GOP Congressmen and Senators did what the White House told them to do and said what the White House told them to say; even Republican legislators who had been in Congress long before George Bush was elected President tied themselves tightly to him, avoiding public disagreement on any of the salient issues, particularly Bush's tax cuts, Iraq and terrorism policy and initiatives sponsored by the Vice President.

Obviously 9/11 and the spike in public support for Bush afterward was a big part of this. But the nationalization of American politics, and the vastly greater ability campaign professionals now have to target likely supporters in everything from Congressional redistricting to Election Day turnout activities also contributed -- because most Republican legislators were elected in districts that would support Republicans unless something unusual happened, something that made being a Republican an electoral liability.

Bush took care of the rest himself. When his great popularity among Republicans turned into modest popularity only among Republicans, the GOP legislators who had identified themselves with him and his White House/campaign organization had no where to go. A final factor in 2008 was the fact that many Republican legislators still had safe seats, even while the GOP brand nationally was in free fall. These legislators were hearing from their constituents what they had since 2001 -- support the President -- and they did.

Well, what happened, happened for the Republican Party, and the question Republicans now have to ask themselves is what they are for now that they cannot any longer just be for Bush. It's a question that could take years to answer if Barack Obama turns out to be a bad President. If he turns out to be an effective President, it could take a generation or more.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 3:52PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (44)

Not Change We Can Believe In

Can we make it a condition that Richardson can only become Commerce Secretary if he agrees to grow back his beard?

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 3:05PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (14)

Drip, Drip, Drip

A few Friday afternoon leaks big enough to make a splash:

Hillary will accept Secretary of State offer.

Timothy Geithner will be Obama's pick for Treasury Secretary.

Bill Richardson is a serious contender for Commerce Secretary.

With all the usual off-the-record and thinly sourced caveats, of course.

--David Kurtz

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 2:12PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (13)

Tighter and Tighter

The Franken camp claims the Coleman lead is now down to double digits.

--David Kurtz

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 2:03PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)

The Abiding Mystery Pt. 3

One anonymous reader questions the question ...

I think it's a mistake to pin most of the blame for GOP decline on the intransigence of the Congressional Republicans. Yes, they failed to distance themselves from an unpopular President, but there was always a limit to the distance they might have achieved. What were they supposed to do, campaign on their opposition to the President's policies? When has a congressional party ever established real separation, in the public mind, from a sitting President?

On the eve of the 2006 elections, the NYTimes put Bush's job approval at just 34%. The conventional wisdom was that this represented an ebb tide for the GOP, and that the next election would put a fresh face on the party and allow it to recapture ground. So Republicans stuck to their guns, figuring it couldn't get any worse. As a tactical decision, it was hardly crazy. But three things happened. Things got worse. Defying precedent and probability, Bush's approval numbers sank even further: this time around, to 22%. Then, the Democrats nominated the most compelling candidate to run for executive office in more than a generation. And that candidate decided to keep the campaign focused squarely on the legacy of the Bush administration.

If there's a connection between these two disasters, it can be found in the unwillingness of the GOP to acknowledge when theory diverges from practice. Its foreign policy failed, but it wouldn't acknowledge that. Then its economic policy failed, and it wouldn't acknowledge that, either. Voters have little patience for politicians who seem blind to their own mistakes.

True. There's only so far a congressional party can realistically go in separating itself from its own incumbent president. But I'm not sure that's precisely the issue. And this does focus my attention on how much of this was about Iraq -- both as an issue in itself and as a proxy. As the reader notes, it was "the unwillingness of the GOP to acknowledge when theory diverges from practice. Its foreign policy failed, but it wouldn't acknowledge that. Then its economic policy failed, and it wouldn't acknowledge that, either." In other words, it wouldn't have taken attacking the president himself, just not so clearly taking his dictation on critical issues. I would also note that the reason President Bush's popularity managed to fall from 34% to the unbelievably low level of 22% was closely tied to his and his party's unwillingness to take any cognizance of the results of the 2006 election. Not everyone will shift their support from positions they deeply believe in, just because they're unpopular. And usually that's a good thing -- at least as a matter of personal character. But parties as a whole will usually be more attentive to their demonstrable political interests, even if they can't see when practice departs from theory.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 1:48PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (13)

The Abiding Mystery Pt. 2

TPM Reader DS (and a number of others) makes a good point ...

You missed one thing about the 2006 elections, something I think was more important than corruption (although not unconnected):

Katrina.

Katrina confirmed everyone's worst fears about the Bush administration and incompetence - many were worried already because the Iraq well wasn't going so well, but they gave him the benefit of the doubt until Katrina. At that point everything people (even many who voted for Bush and GOP) suspected was not only true, but worse than imagined.

Suddenly the curtain fell away and everyone could see what a catastrophe we'd been led into and that the GOP cheerled these incompetents all along the way.

Katrina was the moment - look at the polls - the floor fell out from Bush and the GOP at that exact moment.

This is very true. Though, as DS suggests, I think Katrina was more a catalyst. Unfortunately, by the 2006 election, Katrina as an issue in itself had largely moved off the public radar in all but the places directly affected. But it was a profound catalyzing event. It really settled the public mind on the keys issues of hyper-politicization, cronyism and incompetence which had been which had been minority beliefs prior to Fall 2005 and became majority viewpoints afterwards. It also served as a confirmation and metaphor for the unfolding disaster in Iraq. So this is a critical part of the story. But I still think it was Bush and Iraq -- opinions on both of which had been decisively affected by Katrina -- that drove the 2006 wave.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 1:46PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (10)

Yours, Mine, and Ours

When you get Hillary, you usually get Bill, too, but what about the rest of the foreign policy team she would bring with her to State -- and how well would they mesh with Obama's team?

--David Kurtz

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 12:39PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (176)

The Abiding Mystery

Back to back wave elections for one party, like 2006 and 2008, are extremely uncommon in American history. So what are the roots of the 2008 election? Clearly, the trends operated on many levels, some of which will be more apparent to historians in the future than they are to us today. But even now, even over the last eighteen months, there's one cause that remains a mystery to me and for which I've seen no really adequate explanation.

I'd put it something like this.

After the 2006 election, it was very clear that the public had turned strongly against President Bush and the Iraq War. The turn of the public mood wasn't limited to those two issues. There was the general backdrop of discontent with corruption in the executive branch and Congress, and other issues too. But those were the two big, resonating issues.

For a brief interlude after the election, it looked like the congressional GOP might move into some sort of quasi-opposition to the president, at least distance themselves significantly from him. If you remember, there was a brief period of equivocation on Iraq. And then, nothing. Within a month or so, it was clear that elected Republicans were doubling down on President Bush, the Iraq War and pretty much everything else. And that decision was reflected in the presidential nominating campaign as well.

But it's really the congressional GOP that is what I'm most interested in. I remember through 2007 thinking, What am I missing here? How is this not going to lead to another slaughter in 2008? And of course that is exactly what happened. The only thing surprising in retrospect is how aggressively the Republicans seemed to court the disaster.

Let me open it up for discussion. What happened?

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 11:48AM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (68)

The Profits Of Failure

Book Clubbin' on Bart Gellman's Angler: Was Dick Cheney's overstretch made possible by excessive political success or did he profit from failure?

We've been arguing it out all week at Cafe. And next week, we'll keep digging into the twisted remains of the last eight years with a special discussion of Charles Homans' upcoming story in the Washington Monthly: "The Last Secrets of the Bush Administration: How to Find Out What We Still Don't Know."

You know where to find us.

--Lila Shapiro

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 11:21AM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (10)

Good News on Mukasey

The initial reports of Attorney General Mukasey's collapse last night sounded very grim. But his friends and family must now be breathing a deep sigh of relief. According to a Justice Department statement just moments ago, doctors at George Washington University Hospital gave him various stress and cardiac tests overnight. And they all came up normal. So they appear to have ruled out a stroke or cardiac event. And they expect he'll be released from the hospital later today.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 11:05AM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (10)

Tanking

If there's anything the last decade and one half has taught us it is too look very skeptically at purportedly generational political trends. But the latest Gallup poll data is still very telling about the immediate political moment. While the Republican party had a real image problem leading up to the November election, improbably, it's gotten dramatically worse since the election. In October, the GOP's favorable/unfavorable was 40%/53%. Now it's fav. 34% / unfav. 61%. So almost twice as many people have an unfavorable view of the GOP as a favorable one.

Things can change quickly, especially in such unpredictable, unstable times. But major political parties don't get much more unpopular than that.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 9:09AM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)

Election Central Morning Roundup

More transition leaks and drips this morning in the TPM Election Central Morning Roundup.

--David Kurtz

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 12:49AM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (46)

Franken!

Slowly but surely, the Minnesota recount is whittling away at Norm Coleman's lead. With 46% of the ballots now recounted, Coleman's initial certified lead of 215 has fallen to 136. There's no real reason why the rate of change should remain at the same pace through the remaining 54% of the ballots. But the rate over the first couple days has them on track for something pretty close to a tie.

Remember too that there a few hundred disputed ballots that will be reviewed in December. So, there's reason for some cautious optimism if you're a Franken supporter. But this is still in 'who knows' territory.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.21.08 -- 12:11AM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (18)

Mukasey Conscious, Alert, with "Strong" Vital Signs

The DOJ has now released a statement describing Attorney General Mukasey as "conscious, conversant and alert. His vital statistics are strong and he is in good spirits." The AG is currently at George Washington University Hospital and will remain there overnight for observation.

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.20.08 -- 11:13PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (12)

Eyewitness Report on Mukasey (Updated)

I've been in contact with an attendee at tonight's Federalist Society meeting where Attorney General Mukasey spoke for roughly twenty minutes before collapsing

According to this trusted eyewitness, events transpired roughly as follows.

Attorney General Mukasey was roughly twenty minutes into a speech defending the administration's torture policies and particularly arguing against prosecutions of people who made decisions in the aftermath of 9/11 (essentially arguing against what he believed amounted to the criminalization of policy differences).

Some seven or eight minutes prior to the incident a heckler start shouting, calling Mukasey a "tyrant." But the AG seemed unfazed by this; and members of the audience shouted the heckler down.

The eyewitness tells me that Mukasey seemed particularly in earnest about the argument he was making. And when he first began to falter it appeared he was merely choking up. Soon, what at first appeared to be choking up blended into slurred words. Twenty to thirty seconds later he collapsed, his fall broken by a nearby FBI agent.

The room fell silent. After a moment there were shouts from the table where Mukasey's wife was sitting, calling to turn down the stage lights. A woman in an evening gown, presumably a doctor, ran up to the stage and the FBI agents hovering over Mukasey allowed her to attend to him.

The eyewitness told me that Mukasey collapsed at approximinately 10:06 and was taken off on a stretcher at approximately 10:33.

The one additional detail is that this eyewitness says that the medical personnel attending to Mukasey were talking to him for at least part of that period, at one point asking him "can you wiggle your toes." In other words, it appears that Mukasey did regain consciousness to at least some degree before being taken to the hospital.

As emergency personnel were attending to Mukasey, a group of Republican luminaries, including former Attorney General Ashcroft and his wife, created a cordon between Mukasey and the audience to create some degree of privacy.

After Mukasey was taken away the audience was led in a prayer for Mukasey by former Congressman David McIntosh (R-IN).

--Josh Marshall

• print
• share

11.20.08 -- 10:44PM // link | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (12)

Mukasey Collapses During Speech

As you can see in our feature to the right, Attorney General Michael Mukasey collapsed this evening while giving a speech to Federalist Society in Washington, DC. The only further word we've been able to find is from Mike Allen at The Politico, who says that as of 10:30 PM, "medical officials were still working on him on the stage."

Late Update: From the AP, "Associate Attorney General Kevin O'Connor says Mukasey began shaking during a speech to the Federalist Society and collapsed. He did not immediately regain consciousness."

Late Update Two: We're still following this closely, now just minutes after 11 PM. As best we can tell no news service has any new substantive information about the AG's health, other than the initial news that he began slurring his speech and then shaking and then collapsed. There seems to be no solid information about whether he regained consciousness.

--Josh Marshall