Will support for bailout doom Senate Republicans?

[CARLHAYDEN]

All indications I have seen indicate that the strongest opposition to the proposed bailout comes from conservative Republican voters.

Stevens, Coleman and Smith (Oreg.) are already in tough reelection fights.  I believe that Graham may be joining them. 

So, if they support the bailout, will it doom their campaigns?

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

That's not what would doom Stevens.

[The Mikado]

But they won't.  It's part of the Congressional Republicans' devious plan to have the Democrats push the bailout through, vote against it, and hang the Bush Administration on the Democrats.  It's why the House Republicans were so hostile to Cheney and Nussle's visit yesterday, and why the staunchest opposition to the bill is from the RSC.

Harry Reid wasn't born yesterday, and understands this strategy. Hence the front page of Roll Call this morning: Reid Seeks McCain Pledge: by Erin Billings and John Stanton.

Fearing a political backlash against Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week's end.

Reid made his position clear to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on Monday night, as well as to his Democratic caucus, which shares many of the GOP's concerns that the $700 billion bailout has been drafted too hastily and is a risky remedy for an economy on the brink of crisis.  Reid, according to Democratic Senate sources, also wants assurances from Senate Republican leaders that an evenly divided, bipartisan group of Senators will pass any legislative fix so his party isn't left with the burden of doing an unpopular White House's bidding - again.

(Emphasis mine)

It's really sort of amusing that the Republicans are trying to tie their unpopular President around the other party's neck.

[Nym90]

Hard to believe Stevens would support wasteful government spending, given his splendid track record in such matters.

[CARLHAYDEN]

But they won't.  It's part of the Congressional Republicans' devious plan to have the Democrats push the bailout through, vote against it, and hang the Bush Administration on the Democrats.  It's why the House Republicans were so hostile to Cheney and Nussle's visit yesterday, and why the staunchest opposition to the bill is from the RSC.

Harry Reid wasn't born yesterday, and understands this strategy. Hence the front page of Roll Call this morning: Reid Seeks McCain Pledge: by Erin Billings and John Stanton.

Fearing a political backlash against Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week's end.

Reid made his position clear to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on Monday night, as well as to his Democratic caucus, which shares many of the GOP's concerns that the $700 billion bailout has been drafted too hastily and is a risky remedy for an economy on the brink of crisis.  Reid, according to Democratic Senate sources, also wants assurances from Senate Republican leaders that an evenly divided, bipartisan group of Senators will pass any legislative fix so his party isn't left with the burden of doing an unpopular White House's bidding - again.

(Emphasis mine)

It's really sort of amusing that the Republicans are trying to tie their unpopular President around the other party's neck.

I ran the numbers, and I doubt that Bush can get more than one third of Republicans in either the House of the Senate to support the bailout (if that).

[Stranger in a strange land]

The only one it might actually doom is Smith, because he's a moderate in a Democratic-leaning state with a conservative Republican party.

[Smash255]

well you can't doom something which has already been doomed.

[Χahar]

well you can't doom something which has already been doomed.

Super-doom?

[Tender Branson]

Probably.  Everyone needs a scapegoat, and everyone wants a savior.  In Germany 1933 the Jews were the scapegoat and Hitler was the savior.  In America 2008 Republicans will be the scapegoat and Obama will save us all.

[Torie]

Probably.  Everyone needs a scapegoat, and everyone wants a savior.  In Germany 1933 the Jews were the scapegoat and Hitler was the savior.  In America 2008 Republicans will be the scapegoat and Obama will save us all.

Are you coming around to the point of view, that McCain at this juncture is on the ropes?

[Sam Spade]

It is an interesting dynamic.  The bailout has to pass in order for Republicans not to get crucified in the upcoming elections, but Senate Republicans up for serious re-election efforts have to avoid it altogether.  Same thing in the House.

If the Republicans are in any way intelligent, they coax the members who are retiring (by my count 4 in the Senate, excluding Hagel, and 20 or so in the House), the members not up for re-election in the Senate, and any safe House seat members who will vote for this on principle and have that make up their quorum.

Pelosi will do the same, no doubt.

[Meeker]

It is an interesting dynamic.  The bailout has to pass in order for Republicans not to get crucified in the upcoming elections, but Senate Republicans up for serious re-election efforts have to avoid it altogether.  Same thing in the House.

If the Republicans are in any way intelligent, they coax the members who are retiring (by my count 4 in the Senate, excluding Hagel, and 20 or so in the House), the members not up for re-election in the Senate, and any safe House seat members who will vote for this on principle and have that make up their quorum.

Pelosi will do the same, no doubt.

^^^

The problem is that the members who are generally in favor of it can't vote for it without losing, and then the ones who can afford to vote for it generally don't like it.

The final vote in the House is going to be one of the strangest coalitions we've seen in quite some time.

[Tender Branson]

Probably.  Everyone needs a scapegoat, and everyone wants a savior.  In Germany 1933 the Jews were the scapegoat and Hitler was the savior.  In America 2008 Republicans will be the scapegoat and Obama will save us all.

Are you coming around to the point of view, that McCain at this juncture is on the ropes?

Oh, he's always been on the ropes; the odds have always been against him.  There's a chance that McCain will come back, but only a slim one.

Here are some things to consider.  There's something called the "14 year rule".  It says that if you've been in office, in the spotlight for more than 14 years, then you can't be elected President.  You have an 'expiration date' - except if you become Vice President, during which the expiration is stalled.  McCain 'expired' in 2000.  Obama will 'expire' in 2018.

Then there are the so-called 'keys' to the White House, that favor the Democrats.  And this was before the economic downturn.

The only way McCain can win this election is if he paints Obama as too radical and too unacceptable to be elected President.  The Bradley effect will also help, but if this is McCain's only hope then he will lose for sure.  He can't win running a conventional campaign.  The nation will not accept a conventional Republican.  Basically, the country really wants to elect a Democrat but isn't sure if they want Obama.  Obama has been helped by external events - had it not been for the economic crisis, this election would still be nearly tied.  This economic failure was a big game-changer in his favor.  It has had the effect of making Obama, not McCain, the safer choice.

There is another potential game-changer, one that no one wants to happen - a terrorist attack on U.S. soil.  This would send both campaigns into extreme confusion.  There is no telling what would happen should that disaster take place.

They say that politics is an eternity, and this is true - but the eternity gets longer and longer the closer you get to an election.  With every passing moment the stakes grow higher and higher.

McCain has to stop allowing himself to be defined as a Bush clone.  I cringed during the debate when McCain refused to respond to Obama's attacks.  It is not Bush that is sinking McCain, it is the fact that he is too allied to "government as usual".  McCain will have to turn around and charge that he, not Obama, is the true maverick, while Obama is the tool of radical interest groups who seek to destroy the American tradition and establish socialism.

I have always said that Obama is caught in endless momentum - that is, his campaign will accumulate either positive or negative momentum.  If he does well, he'll keep doing well.  If he does poorly, he'll get nervous, get stressed, and do even worse.  This economic disaster really bailed him out.  For him to keep doing worse and worse, he'll need a bad moment.  This will get harder and harder as his confidence increases.

I would not mind a Democratic victory in November.  I just wish the ticket was reversed - or better yet, that Obama was not on it at all.

[CARLHAYDEN]

But they won't.  It's part of the Congressional Republicans' devious plan to have the Democrats push the bailout through, vote against it, and hang the Bush Administration on the Democrats.  It's why the House Republicans were so hostile to Cheney and Nussle's visit yesterday, and why the staunchest opposition to the bill is from the RSC.

Harry Reid wasn't born yesterday, and understands this strategy. Hence the front page of Roll Call this morning: Reid Seeks McCain Pledge: by Erin Billings and John Stanton.

Fearing a political backlash against Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week's end.

Reid made his position clear to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on Monday night, as well as to his Democratic caucus, which shares many of the GOP's concerns that the $700 billion bailout has been drafted too hastily and is a risky remedy for an economy on the brink of crisis.  Reid, according to Democratic Senate sources, also wants assurances from Senate Republican leaders that an evenly divided, bipartisan group of Senators will pass any legislative fix so his party isn't left with the burden of doing an unpopular White House's bidding - again.

(Emphasis mine)

It's really sort of amusing that the Republicans are trying to tie their unpopular President around the other party's neck.

I ran the numbers, and I doubt that Bush can get more than one third of Republicans in either the House of the Senate to support the bailout (if that).

Er, just thought I'd update this with a sentence from MSNBC's stie:

"More than two-thirds of Republicans and 40 percent of Democrats opposed the bill."

[CARLHAYDEN]

Update:

Heard from my contacts on the bailout opposition from outside Arizona, and am reliably advised that several House Republicans were requested to vote against the bailout to defeat it before it got to the Senate, by Republican Senators seeking reelection!

[SamInTheSouth]

All indications I have seen indicate that the strongest opposition to the proposed bailout comes from conservative Republican voters.

Stevens, Coleman and Smith (Oreg.) are already in tough reelection fights.  I believe that Graham may be joining them. 

So, if they support the bailout, will it doom their campaigns?

Stevens is already doomed.

[CARLHAYDEN]

All indications I have seen indicate that the strongest opposition to the proposed bailout comes from conservative Republican voters.

Stevens, Coleman and Smith (Oreg.) are already in tough reelection fights.  I believe that Graham may be joining them. 

So, if they support the bailout, will it doom their campaigns?

Stevens is already doomed.

First, the federal persecution of Stevens is falling apart.  They're trying to hide the key witness in defiance of subpoenas!

Second, Stevens has come through for a lot of Alaskans over the years, which is likely to be remembered.