Skip to comments.Red-state Democrats may break with White House
Posted on 01/19/2013 7:53:53 AM PST by SeekAndFind
For Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and his top lieutenants, the challenges of balancing the 2014 Senate map and President Barack Obamas second-term agenda could cause as many headaches as anything Republicans throw at them.
Overall, 20 Democratic-held Senate seats are up for grabs next year, versus 13 for Republicans. Democratic incumbents face reelection in solidly red states like Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana and South Dakota, all of which Obama lost by double-digit margins in November.
A little more than a year after Obama is sworn in to another term, there will be high-profile Senate races in swing states like Colorado, North Carolina and New Hampshire. One red-state Democrat Sen. Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.) has already announced his retirement, putting in play a seat that has been in Democratic hands for nearly three decades.
While Obama is now riding high in public-opinion polls and the GOP is struggling with historically low approval ratings senior Democratic senators and aides say the president must face a stark political reality even as he begins his second term as commander in chief. Newly reelected and emboldened red-state Democrats, as well as senators up for reelection in 2014, want and need to show independence from the White House. For these Democrats, a visit or endorsement by Obama is not going to help them win, although they will be happy to have his money or checks from his donor network.
From guns to immigration to budget fights especially possible cuts to the popular Medicare and Medicaid programs these upcoming battles will expose the fault lines within the Democratic Party. Obama will have to juggle the political needs of red-state Democrats even as he tries to outmaneuver a House GOP leadership pulled to the right by its hardliners. Reid singles out those who are up for reelection and does whatever he can to promote their agenda and protect them from politically charged votes, aides said Friday.
What you have in the Democratic Caucus probably more so now than the Republican [Conference] you have a sizable amount of moderates, Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), up for reelection in 2014, told POLITICO. We are kind of practical, lets get things done, were willing to try some new stuff. But were not going to do the same ol, same ol. I think thats a struggle with the administration at times.
We may have some other agenda ourselves, added Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), who also faces voters in two years. We may as a Senate decide that we want to do something about jobs. The Senate may decide it wants to do something about small business and a tax package. We may want to do something on tax reform itself. Our agenda depends on our 55 senators [and] what we decide we want to put on the floor.
A senior Democratic aide said the White House must recognize the blunt political reality that 20 Democratic senators will face reelection in a cycle in which control of the Senate is at stake.
And if they want to actually get stuff done, theyre going to have to make an effort to work with us, and personally reach out to the Mark Pryors, and the Mary Landrieus and listen to those folks and make them feel heard, the aide said. It cant feel like an oppositional relationship, it has to feel like were partners with generally the same but sometimes slightly different options on how to get there.
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE REST...
The Dems in the red states KNOW they are in trouble BIGTIME over theats by both run away spending and out of control DC.
Obama can lead Republicans around by the nose, so he can certainly get red-state Dems to fall in line.
You will see a lot of balking by conservative Dems who could very well end up taking sides with those GOPers from the red states.
This doesn’t matter. Montana and W VA just re-elected lib-holes. They’ll. do so again.
I didn’t notice any of them saying they may want to do something about PASSING A BUDGET. What a bunch of morons.
I haven’t heard of any real opponent for Pryor (D-Arkansas).
Rep. Womack (R-District 3) may try to unseat Pryor like his predecessor, Boozman (R, former District 3 Rep) defeated Lincoln (D).
Womack may find some serious opposition as he and the now former Dem Representative both voted FOR the fiscal cliff bill, while the other two R-Representatives voted AGAINST it. The Dem was replaced in the last election by a Republican, so in the current House, Arkansas has 4 Republican representatives.
Asa Hutchinson (R) threatens to run for something occasionally — Senate, maybe; Governor, maybe; Dog Catcher, maybe.
I think you are right but it probably has more to do with how stupid Republicans are.
Begich is NOT a moderate. He votes left 95% of the time.
Just more mis-direction put out by the commie-rats.
This is serious and it falls down on who chooses NOT TO RUN. Just look at all the former governors out there who have already won statewide offices at least once. This time it will have to be some that will just have to put their WH aspirations aside. I’m talking Palin, Huckabee, Jindal. Montana has a former governor who spends his time in DC making money. The good news is that Gov. Rounds (sd) will run and so will the best candidate in WV. This board does not like Ms. Capito but at least she’s no Todd Akin.
With what is going on at the present time, with the gun control issues and the budget mess, 2014 could very well see that backfiring among the Dems though.
To the administration, this means they have a year to shove it all through before serious opposition arises. Executive order, regulation, by whatever means available. They do not care about Democrats any more than they care for any vestige of the republic.
“The Dems in the red states KNOW they are in trouble BIGTIME over threats by both run away spending and out of control DC.”
Really? How so? How has the gop by way of contrast distinguished themselves as being any less reckless with regard to spending or protection of our liberties than the ‘rats?
“I think you are right but it probably has more to do with how stupid Republicans are.”
I used to think the gop was stupid and/or spineless. But I find myself not thinking that way so much anymore. It’s like the oft used phrase: it’s not a bug, it’s a FEATURE.
The gop wing of our one party system is only marginally more interested in cutting spending or balancing the budget or protecting our liberties than the ‘rats are. When push comes to shove, the gop will fall pretty much in line with the ‘rats, the problem they face being not so much the issue at hand but how to best spin it with their base? Hence we end up with these long and dramatic “fights” over things like the so-called fiscal cliff, sequesters, etc. The end is never really in doubt, but the gop does have to put on a show to keep up appearances.
It’s three card monte, and we’re the suckers for continuing to play.
I really hope people aren’t fooled by their lies.
One would hope that 2014 will more likely mirror 2010 than 2012 - the low information voter (that's a kind term for Democrat useful idjits) tends to not realize there's anything going on during off-presidential elections, so the swing to the right is much more plausible.
Montana used to be a state of rugged self reliant individuals back in the 60s when I lived there. It has been infiltrated by the rich left to such an extent a friend of mine from Billings calls it Montanifornia.
DO NOT MISREAD WHAT’S HAPPENING!!!
The reason that Obama’s Executive Orders were so mild is because the Red State Democrats (both Senate and House) have been BURNING UP HIS PHONE LINES begging him to not push gun control...at all. They know they will GET HAMMERED if they have to vote on it - and it will ONLY bring bad things.
If they vote with the President, they lose in November. If they vote against him on gun control, then some cranky school teacher (yea, I know, a redundant term) will beat them in the Primary. THEY CANNOT WIN!!
It is them that are stopping the President, not the NRA. The President could care less about the NRA, and so can the Dems - but they know what’s in store if they get on the wrong side of the NRA.
Keep a close eye on 2014.
“We heard similar leading up to the 2012 election. The Pubbies were supposed to take 5 seats or more and take control of the Senate. Instead, in their usual pulling defeat out of the jaws of victory style, they actually lost seats.”
Well hopefully we don’t TOTAL IDIOTS in 2014, as we managed to do in 2012.
South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD)ought to loose big time as he voted for Obmacare, supported cap and trade and will likely fully agree with Obama’s gun grab. Since his massive stroke in 2006 he has only made limited appearances as his speech is still affected and had no debates with his opponent during his last run for his Senate seat. I think the people of South Dakota might be appalled at how much his stroke affected his judgment.
If the Republicans do not define themselves and define themselves as the solution to Obama in the eye of the low-information voter, they will continue to lose elections.
Right now, losing elections appears to be the Republican strategy.
I have a relative who is the county sheriff. He is a dim. I have never understood why. He is a Christian. But the dims got him to run for election some years ago, backed him, and he won. Now they continue to back him. He has played with switching parties because he is afraid that he is going to be held liable at the next election for Obama and his policies. I told him he will, and should. I told him, you support the dims, you are a dim, you say you are a Christian, yet you support a party that pushes abortion and homo marriage. How can you do that? I think he is a coward. He had rather throw out what he says he believes in to stay in office. He is afraid that if he changes from dim to rep that he will not get reelected, but if he stays a dim, he might not get reelected. I again, believe him to be a coward for not standing up for his Faith and not a political party. Basically, he makes me sick. I have never voted for him and will not. If he jumps parties, I have thought that I still cannot vote for him even if he switches. The switch would only be because he fears that he will be liable because he was a dim.
You just described the majority of LEO’s in this country. They are mostly men (and a few women) who are devoid of any moral compass. Whose main goal is to stay elected and then go into retirement and continue to live handsomely off the voters. Oh and most of them are into abuse of their office and the citizens they claim to “serve.”
The Dem leadership can coerce whatever they want from the people. They know where all of the skeletons are hidden just as they do with the -R’s. When Harry and thge “Queen bitch of the House” proclaim something done, IT GETS DONE”.
America’s only hope at this point is that the left’s grip on Washington is merely a side effect of the Obama personality cult and that in elections where he isn’t running—2014,2016—the Obamatons stay at home.
But I don’t think so.
If the demosocialist want this bad enough they will get the vote in the senate even if it were to mean they would actually lose control of the senate, if there are anymore elections or possibly they now have the “ground game” to win any state or will have by Nov. 2014.
It’s more of tussle over whether to increase federal funding for federal government or for state and local governments (pork).
I sympathize. I have a sister who actually said to me “I guess I’m a SOCIALIST!”
And she works for the city, as the comptroller for the FIRE DEPARTMENT! (eek!)
Old Irish saying:
Ye can pick your friends, but your relatives get WISHED on ye.
The red state senators are looking for bribes. They will vote for the jug eared Kenyan’s gun control if the price is right. Just like they did with obama care.
Thanks SeekAndFind. Not only this — they’ll also vote against Obamacare, you just wait and see. /flashback
As John Wayne said in the 1948 movie, “Red River:” “That’ll be the day.”