Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

takakupo

(15 posts)
Wed Nov 12, 2014, 10:51 AM Nov 2014

Should Harry Reid Retire in 2016?

Harry Reid is synonomous with the successes and the failures of the Obama administration, but perhaps more credit can be given to the incumbant senator for the failures as his antiquated, gentlemenly style dragged all items on the Democratic down to the pits of death after Scott Brown was elected in 2009. These failures were exacerbated by the Republican wave (or more correctly put, the Democratic drought) in 2010 when the GOP swept into power across the nation with magnificent consequence, gerrymandering the absolute crap out of almost every state in the union. Republicans have effectively secured the house till 2022 and have made it harder to redraw the map as state districts were redrawn just as harshly.

But Republican ambition hasn't been the only issue that's afflicted Redi's reptutation for goody-two-shoes. His quiet demeanor and ever forgiving personage didn't even bat an eyelash at the speaker of the house, John Boehner, telling the Senate Majority Leader to quote, "Go f*ck yourself!" In fact, the most outraged that Reid has ever appeared to the opposition party was just recently when he said, "Republicans are addicted to Koch."

Reid has a reputation outside of the senate for being quirky and telling some racy jokes here and there (sometimes just racist), but he's never been one to make a wave. As senate majority leader, many stand by his actions and his inactions as he stalls controversial votes and blocks some more extreme legislation from the house. But in this day and age, most of us are clamoring for a different kind of leader. Someone who both challenges Republicans dramatically, politically, and cleverly, but also is willing to stand their ground. Someone who will keep Democrats in line and rallies the troops behind legislation like universal background checks when five Democratic senators, two of whom just lost reelection anyway (Mark Begich, Mark Pryor; Heidi Heitkamp from North Dakota is up for Reelection in 2018; Max Baucus retired this year), voted against the measure.

Reid is also getting older and Nevada is getting more Hispanic. We still lack a Latina in the high chamber and there is one woman who could fill his spot even though she just lost her bid in the most recent Republican drizzle/2014 midterm. The one woman that Reid championed for Lieutenant Governor this last year: Lucy Flores.

It isn't a question of whether we should endorse Flores though. The democratic nominee should be the most qualified, bonfide Nevadan. But Flores is a good start in looking for someone to replace Reid. The real question is, do we as Democrats want to replace him? Or do we think that he deserves his spot in the senate? Does he deserve to remain the majority leader if he is still around when Democrats retrieve the majority?

Your ball!

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

merrily

(45,251 posts)
1. Senate leaders get elected and re-elected if they protect the members of their caucus.
Wed Nov 12, 2014, 11:04 AM
Nov 2014

Reid was plenty tough and skillful in strategy when his caucus was on board with what he was doing. When they weren't he seemed meek.

I have no brief for Reid. However, I think it's a mistake to think things will change much if the leader changes.

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
2. He can stay in the Senate if he wants but
Wed Nov 12, 2014, 11:32 AM
Nov 2014

a new leader would be helpful. I never understood why either parties keep leaders for so long.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
7. "I never understood why either parties keep leaders for so long."
Wed Nov 12, 2014, 01:39 PM
Nov 2014

Because they like how they are doing the job. If they didn't, they would replace them.

The primary job of a majority or minority leader is to protect his or her caucus. Reid does that very well, even if he has to take the heat himself for being weak or whatever.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
3. No. He's a walking talking rule book and that is why HIS CAUCUS re-elects him by acclamation
Wed Nov 12, 2014, 11:51 AM
Nov 2014

each session. He's also tough as nails, notwithstanding that soft, high voice. He used to be a boxer.



The Senate Democratic caucus would lose a vital cog if they lost Harry.

You never, EVER trade out seniority if you can help it.

angrychair

(8,678 posts)
4. YES.
Wed Nov 12, 2014, 12:08 PM
Nov 2014

YES. YES.
He should takePelosi and all the DNC leadership with him. We need new Party leadership. Don't keep doing the same thing and expect different results.

Paladin

(28,243 posts)
6. Reid deserves nothing at this point. Out with him.
Wed Nov 12, 2014, 12:15 PM
Nov 2014

And Pelosi and Wasserman Shultz can hit the road as well.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Should Harry Reid Retire ...