No politician is a savior, and no single politician can fix the gridlock in DC. But you gotta start somewhere, and Elizabeth Warren’s Senate campaign is as good a place as any. Along with Mazie Hirono’s campaign to take Sen. Daniel Akaka’s seat, and the prospect of replacing Joe Lieberman with an actual Democrat, Warren’s push for Teddy Kennedy’s old seat is a real chance to improve the performance of the Upper Chamber. Warren is off to a great start, surprising everyone with her robust fundraising from small donors.
Elizabeth Warren raised more than $3 million in a little more than six weeks to fund her Senate bid in Massachusetts, her campaign announced Monday.
The astounding figure anchors the notion that Warren will be a formidable candidate both in the Democratic primary and — if she wins the primary — against Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.).
I’ll also note that Rep. Tammy Baldwin would be a significant upgrade over Sen. Herb Kohl who is retiring in Wisconsin.
The country is basically ungovernable because of the requirement that the Senate Majority Leader have 60 votes to do almost anything. But the problem is not just that there are too many Republicans in the Senate. There are too many crappy Democrats. When you have a chance to replace a lousy Democrat with a decent one, that’s almost as good as knocking out a Republican. The races in Hawaii, Wisconsin, Connecticut, and Massachusetts offer us an opportunity to upgrade in a big way.
I can’t say I am as excited about other races where we’d be either replacing a lousy Dem with another lousy Dem (Virginia) or a lousy Republican with a lousy Dem (Nevada), but those races are important, too.
And someone needs to step up in Arizona. We desperately need that seat. If it ain’t gonna be Richard Carmona then we need to know that.
It’s hard to get excited about electoral politics right now, but there are at least a few races that can get my pulse up. Warren’s race is at the top of the list.
The country is basically ungovernable because of the requirement that the Senate Majority Leader have 60 votes to do almost anything.
It’s not a requirement, it’s a choice. Don’t sugarcoat things. Senators deem stupid rules more important than fixing this country.
The newer senators are less convinced.
Just to expand on this point, here are the Senate Democrats who’ve never experienced the “glory days” of the bipartisan Senate:
2006: Amy Klobuchar – MN
Ben Cardin – MD
Claire McCaskill – MO
Jon Tester – MT
Sherrod Brown – OH
Bob Casey, Jr. – PA
Sheldon Whitehouse – RI
Jim Webb – VA
2008: Mark Begich – AK
Mark Udall – CO
Al Franken – MN
Jeanne Sheheen – NH
Tom Udall – NM
Kay Hagan – NC
Jeff Merkley – OR
Mark Warner – VA
2010: Michael Bennett – CO
Richard Blumenthal – CT
Chris Coons – DE
Kristen Gillibrand – NY
Joe Manchin – WV
That’s 21 members of a 53 member caucus. Elect Democrats in the four states Booman highlighted and, even allowing for possible/expected losses in some of the 2006 states, roughly half the members of the next session’s Democratic caucus will have no personal experiences of and allegiances to the “comity” of the Senate.
True, some of those senators are (for various reasons) less likely to support eliminating or weakening the filibuster. But a good number of the more senior senators (including leadership) are increasingly open to such a change.
To conclude: the more progressives in the Democratic caucus, the better the chances of a functioning Senate—both on public policy and in terms of the Senate’s own rules.
But the problem is not just that there are too many Republicans in the Senate.
To cadge from Mr. Clemens, it’s also that the lightning isn’t properly distributed.
Warren is going to take it to him. …and I love that.
Are you suggesting that Democratic outreach to the Hispanic community is some sort of failure when the best it can do in Texas and Arizona is a former Republican surgeon general and the Iraq War commander in charge during Abu Ghraib?
Because, quite frankly, talk like that will never get you very far with the DNC, mister.
yeah, I’d say that Patty Murray should step up her game.
The same could be said for Steve Israel. He’s trying, lamely, to coopt the Occupy movement to fund raise/harvest email addresses for the DCCC.
I happen to think Sanchez is a decent candidate. Not sure it’s entirely fair to hold Abu Ghraib against him either.
Define “entirely.”
I mean, I am sure I could agree with you without it making a lick of difference.
Joe the Plumber is running for Congress.
Maybe McCain will go around Ohio with him.
Joe the Plumber is on a self-promotion tour through a vanity Congressional run.
The only reason that he can even contemplate it is because his district is the super-jerrymandered district the Ohio Republicans cooked up to mush Dennish Kucinich and Marcy Kaptur into the same district. If a Republican had a shot in that district, Not-Joe the Not-A-Plumber would not be even thinking about running. As it stands he can make his quixotic run, get his name in the paper for a while, collect some money, and keep those low-grade speaking gigs coming.
Do you think Kaine is as lousy as Webb? I think he would be an improvement. Unfortunately mentally unbalanced and all around racist dimwit George Allen is the Repug running for that seat. So you gotta be excited about Tim Kaine! I have contributed to Warren and Kaine so far.
Webb is unorthodox. He’s good on many issues and bad on a few.
Kaine strikes me as another Evan Bayh-type. Maybe slightly better than Bayh, but not by much.
He could be worse, it all depends on how much he’s changed since his governorship — and by changed I mean how he’s reacting to a more liberal Virginia; Bayh was pro-stem cell research, Kaine was against it. Bayh was also more pro-union (Kaine was in favor of right-to-work laws here).
To the right of Evan Bath, yuck! Doesn’t even pay to waste gas driving to the polls.
Last time I recall looking at any polling numbers on Warren, she was looking pretty good. Of course it’s very early to get very excited about those. Still, she is one of the better Dems that I’ve seen.
Thanks for this, BooMan. Electing strong progressives in Democratic primaries is a key way to begin getting better results out of Congress.
Is the progressive Dem candidate in Connecticut Chris Murphy, or should we be looking at someone else?
Why don’t you tell me. Chris Murphy seems decent. Can we do better?
No. Chris Murphy has a future in leadership. We should rally around him.
Recently retired USAF General Jonathan George just announced for the IN-9th District.
My first impression is that he will be a triangulator, but sadly, that’s probably what it takes to be elected in the bible belt these days. At least, it would rid us of a teabagger who’s just a placeholder for the wing-nuts. <sigh>