New Senate Minority Leader

[A18]

One option of course is Kerry... but that doesn't seem likely.

What are some names that might pop up?

[MHS2002]

Harry Reid seems to be a front runner for the job.

[A18]

Where from? Nevada?

[Sam Spade]

Chris Dodd will be the other main candidate, probably.

[elcorazon]

how about Durbin?

[Sam Spade]

Durbin is a possibility.

[No more McShame]

Reid would be a relatively moderate choice.  Dodd would be a little more hard-line, like the House Dems choosing Pelosi.

[Beef]

Reid has 30 committed votes. He wins.

If so, that would be a very, very smart move on the part of the Democrats.  They need to make a move to a more compromising, inclusive position on wedge issues.  The big challenge is how to do this without alienating the hard-left.  They will have to keep their commitment to the poor, workers, minorities, the environment, etc.  Because if they don't, they will continuously get killed by third-party candidates in Presidential elections.

Not an enviable position to be in, but the Republicans will eventually self-destruct.

[Keystone Phil]

how about Durbin?

My least favorite Dem in the Senate. I'm glad some here think he's a possibility. Nothing like the Dem leader moving his party even further to the left.

[Beet]

Reid has 30 committed votes. He wins.

If so, that would be a very, very smart move on the part of the Democrats.  They need to make a move to a more compromising, inclusive position on wedge issues.  The big challenge is how to do this without alienating the hard-left.  They will have to keep their commitment to the poor, workers, minorities, the environment, etc.  Because if they don't, they will continuously get killed by third-party candidates in Presidential elections.

Not an enviable position to be in, but the Republicans will eventually self-destruct.

The Democrats moved to the center before, and ended up getting killed. And recently they moved to the left, and they ended up getting killed. No matter where they move, they end up getting killed. It's like the Eisenhower phenomenon... you can elect an Eisenhower or Clinton, but in the end you are left with a weak, hollow party base and complete lack of momentum. Actually political decisions are more complicated than deciding between appeasement and radicalization. All of the winners in past decades who have actually built on their wins, to the extent that they have, have been people who have brought new ideas, or at least new ways to frame those ideas, to the table. However I do agree Reid would be the better choice.

[zachman]

Nevada is a good state to target because it is fast growing, Ensign is up for reelection in 2006 and it is probably the least Evangelical state that Bush won.

[King]

This might be the reconstruction era of the Democratic Party. Reid is very moderate compared to other high ranking Democrats like Kennedy, Dodd, and Clinton

[Beef]

The Democrats moved to the center before, and ended up getting killed. And recently they moved to the left, and they ended up getting killed.

Here's the trick: you can be compromising on wedge issues without "going to the center."  The Democrats can be as solid-left as ever on workers' rights, civil rights, welfare, the environment, and so forth, while taking compromise positions on abortion, gay marriage, and gun control.  In fact, they already do take a compromise position on gay marriage (no amendment, allow states to recognize civil unions, no recognition of gay marriage).

The Republicans are so successful in part because they are very good at using wedge issues to their advantage.  If the Democrats can neutralize that, they can erode the GOP base.

[Colin]

How are the Republicans going to self-destruct praytell? We are at the height of our power. If you haven't seen we control the Senate, House, Governorships, and State Legislators. Now maybe 30-50 years from now we will be in the position that the Democrats now hold but that is more the natural pendulam of politics than any foreseeable implosion on the part of the Republicans.

[Sam Spade]

I also heard on Fox today that Reid pretty much already has the votes in order to get the position, fwiw.  Also that Dodd will not challenge him.

[Beet]

The Democrats moved to the center before, and ended up getting killed. And recently they moved to the left, and they ended up getting killed.

Here's the trick: you can be compromising on wedge issues without "going to the center."  The Democrats can be as solid-left as ever on workers' rights, civil rights, welfare, the environment, and so forth, while taking compromise positions on abortion, gay marriage, and gun control.  In fact, they already do take a compromise position on gay marriage (no amendment, allow states to recognize civil unions, no recognition of gay marriage).

The Republicans are so successful in part because they are very good at using wedge issues to their advantage.  If the Democrats can neutralize that, they can erode the GOP base.

That's a good point. I heard somewhere that Reid is pro-life. If that becomes widely known, it might disappoint some pro-choicers, but on the whole I think it would be good. We need more pro-life Democrats.

[Beef]

That's a good point. I heard somewhere that Reid is pro-life. If that becomes widely known, it might disappoint some pro-choicers, but on the whole I think it would be good. We need more pro-life Democrats.

On the NARAL scale of 0% being totally pro-life, and 100% being totally pro-choice, Reid gets a 29%.  About the same as Stupak and Obey.  Moderately pro-life, but by no means an extremist.

IF he can get past the abortion-wing of the party (that's a big if), the Democrats will have taken a major step towards winning back the pro-life vote.

I don't know if people understand the extent to which the abortion issue is killing them.  There are people who will not vote Democrat, simply because of abortion.

[Sheliak5]

I didn't know that about Reid, but if it's true it bodes well for the Dems in 2006.

He'll be an good leader, he has more of a spine than Daschle and doesn't seem to have the chronic whining Daschle had.

[Beet]

That's a good point. I heard somewhere that Reid is pro-life. If that becomes widely known, it might disappoint some pro-choicers, but on the whole I think it would be good. We need more pro-life Democrats.

On the NARAL scale of 0% being totally pro-life, and 100% being totally pro-choice, Reid gets a 29%.  About the same as Stupak and Obey.  Moderately pro-life, but by no means an extremist.

IF he can get past the abortion-wing of the party (that's a big if), the Democrats will have taken a major step towards winning back the pro-life vote.

I don't know if people understand the extent to which the abortion issue is killing them.  There are people who will not vote Democrat, simply because of abortion.

Heh, I already know 1.5 people who would vote Dem if not for abortion. One Christian friend outright said, "If it wasn't for the abortion issue, I would vote Kerry in a heartbeat." Another Catholic friend criticized the Republicans for being insensitive and uncompassionate, but will "support the pro-life candidate" and came in to work today feeling great.

[danwxman]

That's a good point. I heard somewhere that Reid is pro-life. If that becomes widely known, it might disappoint some pro-choicers, but on the whole I think it would be good. We need more pro-life Democrats.

On the NARAL scale of 0% being totally pro-life, and 100% being totally pro-choice, Reid gets a 29%.  About the same as Stupak and Obey.  Moderately pro-life, but by no means an extremist.

IF he can get past the abortion-wing of the party (that's a big if), the Democrats will have taken a major step towards winning back the pro-life vote.

I don't know if people understand the extent to which the abortion issue is killing them.  There are people who will not vote Democrat, simply because of abortion.

Heh, I already know 1.5 people who would vote Dem if not for abortion. One Christian friend outright said, "If it wasn't for the abortion issue, I would vote Kerry in a heartbeat." Another Catholic friend criticized the Republicans for being insensitive and uncompassionate, but will "support the pro-life candidate" and came in to work today feeling great.

I dunno...isn't most of the country Pro-Choice?? It seems like there are a lot more Pro-Choice Republicans then Pro-Life Democrats...just because Pro-Choice is more popular...I don't think it would neccessarily be wise to move towards less abortion rights.

[Beet]

That's a good point. I heard somewhere that Reid is pro-life. If that becomes widely known, it might disappoint some pro-choicers, but on the whole I think it would be good. We need more pro-life Democrats.

On the NARAL scale of 0% being totally pro-life, and 100% being totally pro-choice, Reid gets a 29%.  About the same as Stupak and Obey.  Moderately pro-life, but by no means an extremist.

IF he can get past the abortion-wing of the party (that's a big if), the Democrats will have taken a major step towards winning back the pro-life vote.

I don't know if people understand the extent to which the abortion issue is killing them.  There are people who will not vote Democrat, simply because of abortion.

Heh, I already know 1.5 people who would vote Dem if not for abortion. One Christian friend outright said, "If it wasn't for the abortion issue, I would vote Kerry in a heartbeat." Another Catholic friend criticized the Republicans for being insensitive and uncompassionate, but will "support the pro-life candidate" and came in to work today feeling great.

I dunno...isn't most of the country Pro-Choice?? It seems like there are a lot more Pro-Choice Republicans then Pro-Life Democrats...just because Pro-Choice is more popular...I don't think it would neccessarily be wise to move towards less abortion rights.

Yeah but 70-80% of Americans support more gun control as well, but this issue just kills Dems. The real issue is how many people will actually choose their vote based on this issue. From this year's exit polls, apparently quite a lot in the case of "moral values".

[dougrhess]

Would be smart of Dems to think about leaders from the West. If Salazar is good, he'd be a great future leader for the party, like how Richardson could have and Cisneros was supposed to be.

[Beef]

I dunno...isn't most of the country Pro-Choice?? It seems like there are a lot more Pro-Choice Republicans then Pro-Life Democrats...just because Pro-Choice is more popular...I don't think it would neccessarily be wise to move towards less abortion rights.

Maybe if the question were phrased as a dichotomy between "Abortion is completely protected until the baby naturally passes through the birth canal," and "Anyone who takes the life of a human from conception on forward is guilty of murder," a majority of Americans come down on the pro-choice side.  But I guarantee you a majority of Americans do not want legalized Dialation + Extraction, except to save the life of the mother.  The Democrats dig in their heels against any movement on the issue out of fear that the GOP will eventually push for "murder from conception on."  If the Democrats could moderate somewhat on this issue, a) it would win back much of the moralist vote, especially Catholics, and b) it would force the Republicans to moderate as well.

[So the Heroes Fall]

The thing with "partial birth abortion" (D&E) is as Vorlon said earlier, it's basically a big GOP scare campaign to win votes. The procedure is very rare, and the ban passed will hardly have any effect since it's pretty much just peformed to save the life of the mother anyway. Still, the public probably wants some restrictions on abortion, I'll admit more than me, and I would be willing to have abortion legal only in the first trimester except for medical reasons afterwords. As a moderate on abortion who probably comes close to the country as a whole, Reid is a good choice.

these are the positions I would want the Democrats to take on the wedge issues:

Abortion: see above
Gay marriage: against an amendment, leave it up to the states, for civil unions
Gun control: same as Howard Dean. Leave it up to the states.

[Beef]

Abortion: see above
Gay marriage: against an amendment, leave it up to the states, for civil unions
Gun control: same as Howard Dean. Leave it up to the states.

If all Lib-Dems see things the way you do, this is a very good sign for the Democrats.  I agree 100% with you.