Spitzer: Romney Has Lost. The Senate Battle Is What Really Matters.

[TroyD]

Thursday, Sept. 20, 2012

Nobody in the media wants to say it—because we have too much fun calling the play-by-play—but the presidential race is over. After more than a year of watching Mitt Romney, very few undecided voters remain. Despite the significant dissatisfaction with where we are and where we are heading, Romney simply cannot sell the public that he is the guy to move us forward. His missteps and awkward moments are too many to catalog here, but suffice to say that an empty vessel cannot be elected president of the United States.

It is equally certain that the Democrats will not retake the House. Despite massive public dissatisfaction with Congress and the failure of the Republican Party to articulate a coherent program, there are simply not enough districts in play to argue that the House could flip back. Credit gerrymandering and the latent power of incumbency for the probability that John Boehner returns as speaker.

So the Senate is the real game in town. The odds are that the Democrats retain control, since Massachusetts, Missouri, and Virginia are now pretty strongly trending toward Elizabeth Warren, Claire McCaskill, and Tim Kaine, respectively, and Bill Nelson is looking comfortable in Florida. It’s hard to envision the Republicans winning the magic four pickups they need.

In order for President Obama to govern next year, he will need his Democratic Senate to be able to act. Boehner will need to feel cornered. The only way to get him to the negotiating table will be the fear that he otherwise will be seen as the sole obstructionist holding the nation back. As long as Boehner can hide behind an inactive Senate, he will be spared real pressure.

More:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/spitzer/2012/09/20/filibuster_reform_romney_has_lost_the_battle_turns_to_the_senate_.html

[mazzarro]

1. If Boehner returns as speaker

I hope his majority is down to razor-thin. But my preferred outcome will be that the rePIGs are denied majority in both houses as well as losing the Presidency. I will prefer that Obama will have a full lee-way to govern and thus no excuse to not do what he is supposed to do to get things moving again.

[Cosmocat]

2. A small majority in the House

won't enable him to get much done.

They had a fairly nice margin his first two years and barely got done what they got done.

A 2, 3 or even 5 to 10 seat D majority by the dems, you are going to have 15-20 blue dogs that are going to be scared of their shadows.

On some level, as long as the Ds have control of the senate, it MIGHT be better to have a small republican majority in the House.

But, they CANNOT lose the Senate.

Rs with both chambers would be a flaming circus from hell.

[BlueStreak]

3. The filibuster rule is a tricky one.

Clearly the Republicans have abused it. It should not be the case that every important piece of legislation requires 60 votes. But there are some cases where that may be a good idea. The overall concept of the bicameral legislature was that the House would have the firebrands willing to act hurriedly without much thought, while the Senate would move more deliberately.

I am not sure I have heard a good proposal for how to improve the filibuster rule. I do believe it would be good to go back to the days where you actually had to do the filibuster -- you had to take the floor and stay there throughout the entire filibuster, stopping all other Senate business. That would focus much more public attention on the filibuster and the public could decide if the party conducting the filibuster has good reasons.

I think Spitzer is correct in his insinuation that the gridlock hurts the Democrats somewhat. There is only about 10% satisfaction with the House, yet it looks like the public is going to leave the GOP in control there!? WTF? That shows that there is a hazard being perceived as the party in charge. People figure it is the responsibility of the leaders to kick Congress in the pants. We know it isn't that easy, but that's how the broad public sees it.

So without doing something about the filibuster rule, it will be very difficult for the Dems to hold the Senate in 2014.

[mojo2012]

4. American voters can make a difference

So much emphasis on the presidential elections (rightfully so), but while we're talking to our neighbors, friends, family, we have to keep reminding them that it is equally important to elect people who are willing to start "working" instead of obstructing in Congress or the Senate.
If the Republicans gain a majority in either, President Obama will still face an uphill battle....we the voters have the "power" now and we need to help President Obama have a fighting chance....It's our chance to make the change in November!