BREAKING: Snowe not running!!!!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

After her birth control mandate vote, good riddance.

I will say just opposite: "Thank you, Senator Snowe, for being true to your principles. Even after announcing retirement.."

What are her principles?

I too am wondering this, unless the Golden Mean Fallacy can be considered a principle.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

After her birth control mandate vote, good riddance.

I will say just opposite: "Thank you, Senator Snowe, for being true to your principles. Even after announcing retirement.."

What are her principles?

They were to vote as right-wing as possible to help the national party as one can get away with in the 3rd least religious state until she finally had enough with this birth control vote and decided to quit.

[Ogre Mage]

There was an article about Snowe's retirement decision in the NYT.  This quote from a cousin of hers sounded revealing:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/01/us/after-many-tough-choices-the-choice-to-quit.html

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I feel bad for Snowe, but if she had actually carved out some coherent thought process or political praxis that was moderate rather than just trying to play balancing acts for her whole career she might not have ended up in this situation.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I feel bad for Snowe, but if she had actually carved out some coherent thought process or political praxis that was moderate rather than just trying to play balancing acts for her whole career she might not have ended up in this situation.

The Republican party doesn't welcome moderates.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I feel bad for Snowe, but if she had actually carved out some coherent thought process or political praxis that was moderate rather than just trying to play balancing acts for her whole career she might not have ended up in this situation.

The Republican party doesn't welcome moderates.

I meant if she had done so from the beginning. If she had a more forceful personality she might be able to just spend her time trolling the rest of the Senate Republican Conference the way Murkowski, who isn't even actually particularly moderate all things considered (or, at least, who didn't used to be), does.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

This posts sums up Snowe perfectly, as well as the premise of Moderate Heroism which so many here still hold up as a virtue:

Well, obviously could be worse, but basically HP.
The thing is, they don't really have a coherent viewpoint, except they'll vote for anything if you cut around a couple of hundred million from what gets originally proposed. Bush's initial massive tax cuts after taking office? No good. Bush's still quite massive but a bit smaller tax cuts? Fine! Obama's massive amounts of stimulus in 2009? Terrible - deficit here we come, etc. Obama's still pretty massive amounts of stimulus with $100 chopped off by Snowe? Great! Really, though, there's no coherent ideology that says "the policies of the current president, except somewhat cheaper, are always good, even when one of them is a radical supply-sider and another is a liberal Democrat". If you're proposing legislation from the White House's end, you should be able to basically game this system by initially overbidding by $100 million.

[Marokai Backbeat]

This posts sums up Snowe perfectly, as well as the premise of Moderate Heroism which so many here still hold up as a virtue:

Well, obviously could be worse, but basically HP.
The thing is, they don't really have a coherent viewpoint, except they'll vote for anything if you cut around a couple of hundred million from what gets originally proposed. Bush's initial massive tax cuts after taking office? No good. Bush's still quite massive but a bit smaller tax cuts? Fine! Obama's massive amounts of stimulus in 2009? Terrible - deficit here we come, etc. Obama's still pretty massive amounts of stimulus with $100 chopped off by Snowe? Great! Really, though, there's no coherent ideology that says "the policies of the current president, except somewhat cheaper, are always good, even when one of them is a radical supply-sider and another is a liberal Democrat". If you're proposing legislation from the White House's end, you should be able to basically game this system by initially overbidding by $100 million.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that remembers and loves that quote. A perfect summary of Snowe.

[smoltchanov]

What are her principles?

Morderation and compromise. 2 principles i value most of all in politics, which, essentially, is "an art of compromise". And i really dislike (almost tio the level of hate)  boneheaded ideological "purists"

[smoltchanov]

I too am wondering this, unless the Golden Mean Fallacy can be considered a principle.

Look at my answer to redcommander))))

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I too am wondering this, unless the Golden Mean Fallacy can be considered a principle.

Look at my answer to redcommander))))

Very admirable things, except in this situation it wasn't often that she was compromising constructively so much as, as somebody else pointed out, being willing to vote for pretty much anything as long as it was or seemed to be a cheaper version of something else. I have no doubt that she valued moderation and compromise and practiced them to the best of her ability but she just wasn't forceful enough to be a successful broker most of the time.

[smoltchanov]

They were to vote as right-wing as possible to help the national party as one can get away with in the 3rd least religious state until she finally had enough with this birth control vote and decided to quit.

You are not opposed to Democrats voting "as left-wing as possible to help national party..." (and so on), don't you? Then why do you condemn her? IMHO - BOTH parties now (and, especially, their activists, who tend to hew to the most extreme politics of their parties) are huge hypocrites right now: they readly allow itself (and justify it) to do things, which they condemn in opposite party. Hence - my deep dislike of BOTH parties as they are now...

[bgwah]

This posts sums up Snowe perfectly, as well as the premise of Moderate Heroism which so many here still hold up as a virtue:

Well, obviously could be worse, but basically HP.
The thing is, they don't really have a coherent viewpoint, except they'll vote for anything if you cut around a couple of hundred million from what gets originally proposed. Bush's initial massive tax cuts after taking office? No good. Bush's still quite massive but a bit smaller tax cuts? Fine! Obama's massive amounts of stimulus in 2009? Terrible - deficit here we come, etc. Obama's still pretty massive amounts of stimulus with $100 chopped off by Snowe? Great! Really, though, there's no coherent ideology that says "the policies of the current president, except somewhat cheaper, are always good, even when one of them is a radical supply-sider and another is a liberal Democrat". If you're proposing legislation from the White House's end, you should be able to basically game this system by initially overbidding by $100 million.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that remembers and loves that quote. A perfect summary of Snowe.

haha, I also remembered it.

[Miles]

Cutler isn't running but he's encouraging Angus King.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Good riddance. I have more respect for outspoken conservatives than phony moderate heroes.

Why?  What's wrong with being a moderate?

[Miles]

Snowe leaves office with a 69/26 approval rating. This ties Inouye and Barrasso for most popular.

Collins isn't far behind at 60/31.

[LastVoter]

Well Looks like Democrats will hold the Senate now.

[redcommander]

Well Looks like Democrats will hold the Senate now.

No they're not.

[Niemeyerite]

Well Looks like Democrats will hold the Senate now.

No they're not.

Yes, King will caucus with them.

[Reginald]

Well Looks like Democrats will hold the Senate now.

No they're not.

Yes, King will caucus with them.

Even if they pick up Maine, they would lose Nebraska,  North Dakota, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Montana if the election were today. Add in Florida and Virginia as toss ups,and there's the possibility of Republicans picking up 7 seats. Even if Democrats won Massachusetts, Arizona, and Snowe's seat that wouldn't be enough to prevent a Republican majority.

And Nevada? I'd like to hear your proclamation on that one as well, since you appear to be delivering absolute metaphysical certitude here.

[redcommander]

Well Looks like Democrats will hold the Senate now.

No they're not.

Yes, King will caucus with them.

Even if they pick up Maine, they would lose Nebraska,  North Dakota, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Montana if the election were today. Add in Florida and Virginia as toss ups,and there's the possibility of Republicans picking up 7 seats. Even if Democrats won Massachusetts, Arizona, and Snowe's seat that wouldn't be enough to prevent a Republican majority.

And Nevada? I'd like to hear your proclamation on that one as well, since you appear to be delivering absolute metaphysical certitude here.

High Mormon turnout for Mittens should help Heller win. And do you expect Democrats to hold on to the senate especially with the lack of crazy Republicans running this year?

[RogueBeaver]

Yep. Steelman, Rehberg, Allen, Thompson, Mack, Mandel, Scott Brown... no Sharron Angles there.

[Reginald]

Well Looks like Democrats will hold the Senate now.

No they're not.

Yes, King will caucus with them.

Even if they pick up Maine, they would lose Nebraska,  North Dakota, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Montana if the election were today. Add in Florida and Virginia as toss ups,and there's the possibility of Republicans picking up 7 seats. Even if Democrats won Massachusetts, Arizona, and Snowe's seat that wouldn't be enough to prevent a Republican majority.

And Nevada? I'd like to hear your proclamation on that one as well, since you appear to be delivering absolute metaphysical certitude here.

High Mormon turnout for Mittens should help Heller win. And do you expect Democrats to hold on to the senate especially with the lack of crazy Republicans running this year?

I think conjecturing this far out (before we even know who the nominees are in some cases) is pretty much worthless. And the Democrats' potential success or failure certainly doesn't depend solely on how poor the Republican candidates are.

[redcommander]

Well Looks like Democrats will hold the Senate now.

No they're not.

Yes, King will caucus with them.

Even if they pick up Maine, they would lose Nebraska,  North Dakota, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Montana if the election were today. Add in Florida and Virginia as toss ups,and there's the possibility of Republicans picking up 7 seats. Even if Democrats won Massachusetts, Arizona, and Snowe's seat that wouldn't be enough to prevent a Republican majority.

And Nevada? I'd like to hear your proclamation on that one as well, since you appear to be delivering absolute metaphysical certitude here.

High Mormon turnout for Mittens should help Heller win. And do you expect Democrats to hold on to the senate especially with the lack of crazy Republicans running this year?

I think conjecturing this far out (before we even know who the nominees are in some cases) is pretty much worthless. And the Democrats' potential success or failure certainly doesn't depend solely on how poor the Republican candidates are.

True, but I'm going off the environment today, and if Democrats are at this much of a disadvantage in March, it doesn't look like it will get much better. Who knows, maybe some random economic or political news will actually help Democrats pick up seats, but my bets are on them losing control of the senate.

[morgieb]

lol @ anyone claiming the Senate race isn't a tossup.