How do you feel about this?
Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Democratic National Committee chairwoman, is strongly considering a bid for U.S. Senate, calculating that having Hillary Clinton at the top of the 2016 ticket would help lift her candidacy in a year-of-the-woman campaign.
Driving Wasserman Schultz’s interest: the increasing likelihood that Sen. Marco Rubio will run for the White House and that he ultimately won’t seek reelection in 2016, Democratic insiders familiar with her thinking say. Her office wouldn’t discuss her interest in the Senate.
I guess you can judge this two ways. Is she a strong contender? Do you want her to be in the Senate?
Is she a strong contender? Do you want her to be in the Senate?
No. No. She’s been a disaster as DNC chair, among other things.
Just out of curiosity, who was the last DNC chair not named ‘Howard’ who wasn’t a disaster?
That’s because he’s the only one not picked by the party elite. Coincidence? I don’t fucking think so.
f he was DNC chairman, he was, ipso facto, picked by the party elite.
He didn’t come down from the Sierra Maestre and seize the DNC, exactly, as I remember it.
Howard Dean is the progressive 12th imam.
Not really. After the very bad 2002 and disastrous 2004 election results for Democrats presided over by the Clintons’ BFF, too many of the Democratic liberals along with those to their left were angry enough at the party elites they had to toss a bone out to them. Sort of like team Kerry that bowed to the pressure from Edwards’ supporters to put in him on the ticket. Except Dean was adept at his new assignment and Edwards wasn’t.
Then when the WH, House, Senate were in Democratic hands, the elites told Dean to take a hike. And Dean is barely to the left of the DEM DC consensus on but a few issues.
Barely to the Left? I don’t recall Dean pushing SS cuts or means tests. I don’t recall Dean opposing the public option. I don’t recall Dean pushing trade treaties. I don’t recall Dean spitting on Unions. I don’t recall Dean pushing bank deregulation like the Anointed One.
Dean is barely to the left of an actual democrat, not Democrats enamored of right wing policies like most of them are these days.
Dean did support NAFTA in the mid-nineties. He later conceded that that had been a mistake and perhaps made him more cautious in jumping on “New Democrat anti-New Deal” legislation/policies.
Let’s not forget that during Dean’s time in the sun 2003-2008, Democrats were busy letting GWB and the GOP hang themselves with their talk of cutting SS and Medicare. But cutting regulations, cutting social/welfare programs and cutting taxes on the wealthy was enshrined as Democratic Party policy by WJC and Democratic voters are too stupid to get that almost two decades on.
Just look at all the social/welfare programs that got cut once the Dems finally had both houses and the White House.
Obama and many Democrats in Congress did try. And the ideas they floated were only slightly less popular with the general public than GWB’s attempts after his 2004 win.
oh yeh, floating ideas. Obama tried to cut soc sec. this becomes so tiresome. In life, when someone says “let’s form a committee to study X” everyone knows it’s a ways of buying time in order not to do it. why does no one give Obama credit for that- b/c he’s some stupid black guy over his head as prez? it becomes tiresome.
Truly tiresome is leveling this charge against those that supported Obama way back in 2007: b/c he’s some stupid black guy over his head as prez? it becomes tiresome. As if we were conservatives that didn’t notice that Obama wasn’t white.
It would be correct also to state that GWB floated the idea of cutting SS in 2005. However, since Democrats/liberals weren’t deceived about GWB’s and the GOPs intentions wrt to SS, it’s also correct to say that GWB attempted to begin cutting/gutting SS.
when someone says “let’s form a committee to study X” everyone knows it’s a ways of buying time in order not to do it Pardon me, but as there is no problem with the SS retirement system, why the fuck would a study not to do anything about a non-existent problem be rational? Obama began making the claim that a SS problem existed when early in his 2008 campaign and never moved away from the ignorant position regardless of how often Paul Krugman said that it wasn’t so. It’s not as if the SS administration under Treasury doesn’t issue annual reports.
Why would a reasonably smart person like Obama assert that there is a SS funding problem? For the same reason that the reasonably smart Bill Clinton cut capital gains taxes and deregulated financial markets. For a reasonably smart person, why do you fail to grasp what Democratic neoliberal politicians are up to?
how about b/c it’s a major GOP talking point?
Obama is not a neoliberal. sorry if you insist on seeing him that way, but it’s an erroneous
correction: b/c the imminent collapse of social security is/ was a major talking point period even though it was completely wrong [Krugman et al. as you note] a trumped up reason for austerity. so Obama’s supposed to ignore what everyone thinks is a crisis. take a look how it actually played out – you think that’s some lucky break or accident the bumbling black guy stumbled into?
Ditto Phil’s comment. She has been astonishingly bad at the DNC job, incredibly bad at effective messaging. Also, it appears she will attend Bibi’s big speech – which is terrible on its own and also steps on any coherent Dem messaging.
I have an idea: let’s bitch about her after she beats fucking Rubio.
Unless there are better candidates, which I hope there are, first we get rid of the GOP, then we get better Dems.
It’s FL.
Alan Grayson is considering a run. I’d rather have him than DWS.
That’s not exactly a great selection to choose from there, but I’d take pretty much anyone over Grayson. I know a lot of people love him, but my problem isn’t with style so much as character.
Call it the Anthony Weiner problem. Or the John Edwards problem. Don’t get seduced by some language you like and find out later than you supported a bum.
And you think DWS would do better than Grayson, why? Who is she going to inspire to get the voting booth? Will she continue to protect the Diaz-Balart brothers and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen?
Maybe getting her out of the House and away from her nasty friends would help. She could hang out with Bill Nelson instead and he’d set a good example.
Are you referring to his marriage break-up? It seems that wasn’t on him. What exactly are you referring to?
I’d like to know too. First I’ve heard of this. Mentioning Weiner and Edwards strongly suggests more than just a garden-variety marital breakup, more than mere marital infidelity by the husband.
A shame if there’s anything along those lines with Grayson. I tend to not only like his politics, but also tend to think his aggressive style is badly needed in a party whose members have long been too soft-spoken and polite to the opposition.
I’m not from FL but I have a feeling he would get smoked state wide
And DWS wouldn’t? She couldn’t even beat a crook with her hand-picked candidate in the Governor’s race.
well it will be her this time and not another person
Grayson doesn’t strike me as a master campaigner himself
Interesting the timing of Boo’s post and the news the past two days. I get why people dislike Grayson but the stuff about DWS that has now come out is exactly the problem some of us have with her. Why did she get a pass when Grayson doesn’t/didn’t?
He won in a three-way race.
She could make a serious run of it. Nobody should be afraid of him in the least.
It depends on how many markers she has saved during her DNC tenure. Not enough? No, she’s not a strong contender. Enough? Still no, she’s not a strong contender but she’ll get the nod anyway.
No.
AG
I don’t understand.
She has to run in a primary to run in the General, which means any other democrat in the state can run against her. If she wins, she will then be the candidate and will run in the general. She’s a proven campaigner (she’s won her races since 2005), she seems to have lots of good positions, probably has quite a few bad ones but on the whole seems more or less acceptable.
Why the animosity? Why the angst? Who gives a flying fuck whether or not she is a capable administrator of a political party? She’s more interested in her political future than the party? Since when has that been enough to engender disgust and condemnation?
Some of you guys are sure having a lot of fun ranting and raving about Democrats who are running and winning office. Maybe you should take two steps back and see who these guys are running against. Just because someone is not snow white pure doesn’t make the alternative attractive.
And don’t give me that crap about keeping others from running. Political purity doesn’t translate to running effective campaigns. It usually translates to getting your butt kicked in the general, thereby making it MUCH more difficult for the next time around.
Who gives a flying fuck whether or not she is a capable administrator of a political party?
Are you happy with the state of the party since she’s been DNC chair? And what does it tell you when she’d spit in Obama’s eye re: Bibi’s speech?
For some strange, unknowable reason I’d prefer her to Rubio.
Call me crazy.
She’s not the best, but our bench in FL isn’t great, so I think she’s a relatively good option.
Plus, if she runs, she’s probably out of the DNC, and that’s likely a good thing.
She’ll be out of the DNC because Hillary will pick her own person, or else we’re really screwed.
She’s not the best, but our bench in FL isn’t great, so I think she’s a relatively good option.
She’s to blame for that too. She runs the Democratic Party in Florida, on top of the DNC.
I guess that’s a strategy – mess up the Democratic party so it doesn’t have a good bench, and then take advantage of that and run.
Florida is depressing. Such good potential territory for dems, so few good candidates to choose from.
If she wins us the seat, then yes I want her in there
The better question is whether Christie would accept the number two position. I can’t see Jeb ever accepting a subordinate position. And I don’t see Christie getting the nomination for Prez, but a Walker-Christie ticket? Hmmmm. No, not southern enough. Maybe Perry-Cruz?
Of course Christie would accept the #2 slot. That’s not speculation as he already went through the vetting process with team Romney that then rejected him. Walker-Christie — which is probably why a GOV-GOV ticket hasn’t been seen since 1948 and lost.
Is Perry planning to establish residency in another state? Have heard that he likes California, but the feeling isn’t mutual; so, that would mean another GOP nominee that couldn’t carry his new adopted home state. NM or CO would be a better idea.
Do either Rubio or Paul have the cajones to give up their Senate seats for a long shot WH bid?
DW-S would be like another generation of Dianne Feinsteins and that one was never good and has continued for far too long.
Last I heard, RAND Paul was trying to skirt KY law prohibiting one person from seeking two offices at the same election by encouraging the local GOP to change their 2016 primary into a caucus.
As for DWS, I see her overall as more liberal than DiFi, but about the same on Izrul. I’ll easily take her over Rubio or any Gooper though, even if she’s less than perfect and hasn’t been a great party official.
So, first Rand managed to get his own ophthalmology board to certify him in KY. Then he tried and failed to get KY to change its law about running for two offices on the same ballot. Now, he’s working on getting the KY GOP to switch from a primary to a caucus? For such an awesome candidate, he sure doesn’t like the rules that everybody else plays by.
And should he somehow get the GOP POTUS nomination, does KY then change its law for the general election and let him run for two offices? Would be awesome if that happened and he lost both races.
Blech.
Congresswoman Kathy Castor (from the safe Democratic Florida 14th) could do well as the Democratic nominee for Senate. Her district covers Tampa-St. Petersburg, and that should work well. She has only served one term less and is almost exactly the same age (5 weeks older) as DWS. Her mother ran for Senate in 2004, albeit unsuccessfully, losing to Mel Martinez. But that indirect experience is probably quite useful, and she’ll likely have a stronger top of the ticket and much bluer Florida in 2016.
Alan Grayson would also be a strong candidate. Keep in mind he’s (I think) the only member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus among all the names I’m listing in this post.
Gwen Graham could run, though she was just elected. She’s got a Republican-leaning seat, though in 2016 it should be winnable for another Democrat.
I’d prefer Patrick Murphy to stay where he is.
Charlie Crist could make another run, though I’d prefer not since he’d need to be replaced too soon given his age. (He could also run for governor again in 2018.)
Ted Deutsch (21st Congressional District) is another possibility. He’s planning to attend Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech on the eve of the Israeli election, so that’s a mark against him.
Dan Gelber could run, and he’s “well rested” having sat out a couple cycles — not a bad thing. He was unsuccessful in Florida’s Attorney General race in 2010, but that was an off-cycle year (and a really bad one for Democrats). (He started running for U.S. Senate, but he bowed out and switched to AG out of party loyalty, so that didn’t help.) He’s a noted progressive, and he’d be a particularly great choice to help the top of the ticket in Florida if Jeb Bush is the Republican nominee given his state-level battles with him.
This comment shows the state of the Party in Florida. Two of the proposed candidates are just trading on the names of the parents.
The problem for Castor is the same as for Crist: the key for a Democrat is to get the vote out in South Florida, which did not happen in either the ’10 or the ’14 govs race. Both Sink and Crist were from Tampa.
Grayson would be a disaster.
Obama carried Florida twice. And we have won by my count 3 statewide races since 2000 – and one of those was against Kathleen Harris.
On DKos, they love him.
And isn’t that all that really matters.
He was part of the Weiner/Grayson (or was it Grayson/Weiner) 2012 ticket that bubbled up there.
Rubio is going to be the R candidate. He is going nowhere as the R POTUS nominee. He will run for the Senate again.
Let the voters decide. I don’t see her winning in the D race. And as to the Bibi speech, isn’t she Jewish? This is an inside-baseball deal with the Jewish lobby in the House.
I’m OK with any potential Senator who will caucus with the right team and vote for the right Majority Leader. Now, of course I’ll have preferences based on who offers themselves for service, but so long as they send Rubio home ultimately I’m good.
Come now, Oscar, those contradictions don’t heighten themselves…
Bringing sanity back to the politics of the United States will not come from depending on the establishment of either party. And DWS is very much in the Democratic establishment that has chokehold control on the Democratic Party.
It looks like more of what we have now for the rest of my lifetime. Unless the inattention to foreign affairs and the economy drives us into a really huge catastrophe.
If this is “building the bench”, it is moving in the GOP direction. Capable party administrators don’t lose midterm elections with stupid candidate-fielding strategies and failure of campaign coordination. I don’t see her turning out the vote in central Florida and enough of the vote in north Florida to win against any Republican. In part because of the profound failure to do that in 2014. It wasn’t just failure in the blue strongholds that caused the donkey to kick the bucket, it was noncompetitiveness everywhere else.
Has DWS ever had to run a competitive campaign before? Her House seat is pretty safe, right?
Honest Question: Why would Alan Greyson be a disaster?