Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
Before there was what we now call "Obama Derangement Syndrome," there was the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy." This month seems to be now be marking a turning point, to perhaps what might be called a new and virulent "Clinton Derangement Syndrome." Or, more prosaically, what we're now seeing can be said to be the real start of the 2016 presidential election season.
What was even more noticeable was what Republicans shifted to instead: Benghazi! Or, more accurately: "Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!" Yes, the Republicans are doubling down on holding yet another investigation -- in the hopes that this time an actual scandal will emerge, somehow. Also, to tarnish Hillary Clinton (always a worthy motive in Republicanland). Watch for this Benghazi frenzy to play out all summer long, since Republicans quite obviously have nothing positive to offer the voters this year.
The Republican Party's 2014 midterm election strategy was supposed to be simple, since it contained only one plank in the platform: the awfulness of Obamacare. This isn't mere supposition, as Republicans have been freely admitting this for over six months now. They were so sure of their strategy that they didn't even care if everyone knew what it was ahead of time. The midterms would be "all Obamacare, all the time" on the Republican side, and that would usher them into victory. They even convinced themselves to avoid tackling other issues (such as immigration) because doing so would be a distraction from the single-minded focus on Obamacare.
After suffering a negative month in the polls in March, President Obama bounced back in April, gaining back all the ground he had lost and then some (well, "and then a little bit more" would be more accurate...). He still hasn't quite made it back to where his poll numbers were before the Obamacare website rollout, but if the trendlines continue in May, he is at least within reach of this goal for the first time since last October. Let's take a look at the updated chart, shall we?
There was a lot of political news this week, most of it pretty good for Democrats. In the Senate, Democrats forced Republicans to filibuster a minimum wage bill (more on that in a bit), and then the week ended with some very good news in the unemployment numbers.
Three hundred of these columns? To coin a phrase... far out, man.
Over the past five or ten years, Democratic politicians have all but completed a full evolution (to use President Obama's term) on the subject of gay marriage. In 2008, both Hillary Clinton and Obama were against gay marriage. In the 2012 election, Obama came out in support while Hillary did so about a nanosecond after she stepped down as Secretary of State. It is now getting tougher and tougher for any Democratic politician to not support gay marriage. As I said, the evolution is almost complete within the party. The question I now ask is how long that evolution is going to take on a different subject: marijuana reform.
If life were but a metaphor, the headlines would now be reading: "Train Does Not Wreck, Pulls Into Station 7 Minutes Early." Of course, I am speaking of Obamacare, a subject which Republicans have all but reduced (in their own minds, at least) to a mumbling mantra: "trainwreck... trainwreck... trainwreck." But as more and more good news appears, the real story (with apologies to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, of course) is "the train which did not wreck in the night."
This was a big deal. It is worth remembering. Johnson used the popularity he inherited after John F. Kennedy was assassinated to get this crucial law passed. Back then, it wasn't a clear "Democrats versus Republicans" split on the issue of civil rights, it was more geographic. Southern Democrats were the ones fighting the hardest against such legislation. Johnson is reported to have said after signing the bill that he had "lost the South for a generation" for the Democrats by doing so.
Congress is now doing what it normally does, in an election year. This is not intended to sound cynical, as I actually think it is a good thing for a divided Congress to stand up for its divided beliefs -- even while knowing that almost none of the bills it now votes on have a prayer of becoming law before the election. But these bills do serve an important purpose, and that is to define the two parties' differing agendas and priorities for the campaign. The clearer the picture that emerges between Democrats and Republicans, the better idea the citizenry has of what it is supporting in the ballot box, come November. So I actually welcome all the posturing which is now happening in both houses.