"Obama: 'The outcome of these fights will probably rest on one vote in the U.S. Senate'"

[Clio the Leo]

Obama: 'The outcome of these fights will probably rest on one vote in the U.S. Senate'

Organizing for America is blasting this video out to its Massachusetts list, recorded by the president on Martha Coakley's behalf.

Obama frames it with a recognition of the incredibly high national stakes: "It's clear now that the outcome of these and other fights will probably rest on one vote in the U.S. Senate," he said, referring to battles over health care, financial reform, and climate change. "That's why what happens Tuesday in Massachusetts is so important."

Coakley, he says, will be "your voice and my ally." Brown, who goes unnamed, is backed by "opponents of change."

It's worth pausing to consider how enormously high, in political and substantive terms, the stakes really are. If Brown wins, there's a strong chance that health care legislation collapses, leaving the status quo in place in that industry and rendering the central initiative of Obama's first year an unambiguous failure. Coakley's victory will still, at this point, be a kind of a warning shot, but would ensure passage of a bill on which Obama has staked a lot.

(Video by POTUS at the link)
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Obama_The_outcome_of_these_fights_will_probably_rest_on_one_vote_in_the_US_Senate.html?showall

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dave29]

3. are you prepared to throw away any progress

on everything else as well?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RoyGBiv]

20. Yes, I do ...

And, yes, you are part of the problem.

[timeforpeace]

40. Assuming Obama thought he was helping Coakley with this and not Brown, I hope he's right.

[dionysus]

5. well, at least you're boldly taking the next step to vote for NO democrats. great for you

:eyes:

[Kat45]

8. It's not just health care that Obama would need her vote on

Any other piece of legislation that is the least bit progressive is what her vote is needed for. Confirmation of his judges and other appointments is what her vote is needed for. Her vote would be a vote on the side of choice, which her opponent does not favor. There are many reasons it is important to have a Democrat, a progressive Democrat, in this seat. There are enough republicans in Washington obstructing anything worthwhile, we sure don't need someone from this state being another.

[Clio the Leo]

9. IF that is the case....

.... then the voters of Mass are more foolish than the voters here in blood-red TN are.

Vicki Kennedy was able to raise a half a million dollars last night from ONE email to Mass Dem. voters. I suspect there might be a few Mass Dems who disagree with you.

[MUAD_DIB]

16. Don't let one supposed MA DEM's tantrum make you think that we're

batshit crazy.

[Clio the Leo]

12. 52% of those polled approve of the HC bill, 57% approve of Obama....

It would seem that your "many" are in the minority.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/massachusetts-its-not-just-about.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Arkana]

13. Hey thanks for helping Scott Brown!

I don't give a shit what you think about Coakley, you have a responsibility to keep that greasy, lying fascist out of Ted fucking Kennedy's seat. Ego be damned.

[MUAD_DIB]

15. So is your vote going to Brown then by not voting?

Perhaps I misunderstood you.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

21. Another Brown supporter from 'the village must be destroyed in order to save it' crowd.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[treestar]

18. Not just that

There would be many other things. The way this Senate is constructed, you have to elect her just to tread water.

[cliffordu]

38. Then stay home.

We all live with our choices.

[doc03]

2. Judging by the unpopularity of the HCR bill that may be a

bad idea. It may push more people to vote for the Rethug.

[levander]

6. Yeah, but I wonder how popular HCR is in Massachussetts

That states gotta notably more liberal demographic than the average state. It's probable that HCR is at least more popular there. Although, how much more? I dunno. Haven't even seen any polls.

And, you have the fact that Massachusetts already has universal health care. So, the Washington Democrats don't have the threat of, "hey look! this crappy bill we came up with is the only real promise you have of (at least near) universal coverage. Are you bold enough to oppose it?". Being immune to that threat has got to have some impact on the race there.

[levander]

4. Do they think we are simpletons?

Who don't understand a damn thing? Just because it's not the change Obama wants, doesn't mean someone does not want change. I'm really tired of Obama talking down to the voters like this.

Not agreeing with Obama does not make you a "opponent of change". No matter how big his ego is.

[jgraz]

10. And, apparently, that "one vote" is Joe Lieberman's.

Or maybe Olympia Snowe...

[politicasista]

14. Kick

:kick: :patriot:

[depakid]

19. If that's the case, then the country has already lost

and Obama has ceded power to every corrupt two bit extortionist with a K street agenda.

Perhaps the administration reckons that it's as good an excuse as any for "No We Can't" or perhaps- "We never Intended To."

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

22. Or maybe Obama can count to 60, something the hatebaggers around here can't seem to do.

But hey, everyone needs a hobby I guess. I'd think that there would be better ones down under though. You in the outback or something?

[depakid]

23. No- he's pathologically conflict averse- and so has ceded power

to the worst elements of the Senate (and playing "victim"). Just another excuse for not getting 'er done (which leads many to believe that he and his center right administration never really planned to make the fundamental changes required in the first place).

Bunch of bait & switch.

Let me spell it out to you, sucker: R-E-C-O-N-C-I-l--I-A-T-I-O-N.

If it deals with the budget deficit 50 +1 is all that's required (and even that's open to a pretty wide interpretation).

[RBInMaine]

24. You've incorrectly spelled reconciliation, and 10+ Senators won't do it.

[depakid]

27. Sure did- thanks for the heads up (though it is 50+1)

Assuming that Biden's interested in passing whatever might be voted on. I no longer make that assumption as quickly as in the past.

[RBInMaine]

33. Still won't happen even with Biden. Not enough will do it on THIS kind of large bill.

[RBInMaine]

25. Bitch whine piss and moan. Does it ever end with you?

[depakid]

28. Still making excuses for poor public policy- and attacking those who point out why

-and where it's going to leave the party come election time?

Keep pandering to the corporate right- selling out (rather publicly) key constituency after key constituency and that's supposed to fire everyone up to go out and elect more Democrats?

Keep turning popular legislation into unpopular legislation (while abandoning those who stuck their necks out) - and the public is going to rally around your party?

Seems you need a history lesson.

[RBInMaine]

31. You just don't get it. So here we go, and let's try one more time:

1) Liberal and expansion voters helped lot, but Obama won because he won the independents disallusioned with the RePUKES. Moderate independents determine NATIONAL outcomes. That is pure reality, like it or not, and all data absolutely prove it.

2) SCHIP, Lilly Leadbetter law, expanded stem cells, stimulus saving plenty of jobs and creating others including green energy, restrictions pulled on Bush choice rules, working to close GITMO, ending torture, ... happy about ANYTHING AT ALL ?? Would you be better off with a RePUKE? Or do you just complain in general?

3) We are a DIVERSE party, which is good. TeaBaggers, Greens, Libertarians, ... are narrow and can not win nationally. And the TeaBaggers are dominating the pukes. A plurality of Americans are moderate in this large nation, and it is good and necessary to have a big tent party. But that means you must do what the nation is founded upon: compromise. (Sure, we need more political reform. So if you aren't happy, stop complaining and start organizing. Meantime, we do our best with what we have.)

4) Reconciliation won't happen on HCR. 10+ Senators will not go along.

So kindly grow up, get real, and count your blessings.

[depakid]

36. You still don't get it- people aren't buying your excuses- nor will they as the trend continues

Dems were elected with a mandate- which bit by bit- they're squandering, while aligning themselves with the very corporate interests that caused the problems in the first place.

The majority (and often the SUBSTANTIAL) majority agree with progressive positions on the issues- as shown quite clearly from credible data (note that this was prior to the crash):

The Progressive Majority: Why a Conservative America is a Myth.

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/pdf/progressive_majority.pdf

Summary: http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/06/why_a_conservat.html
----------

Pew: Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007.
Political Landscape More Favorable To Democrats

http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/312.pdf

Summary: http://people-press.org/report/?reportid=312

So- no, your "conventional "wisdom" about so called "moderates" is- and has historically over the past two decades been incorrect.

Moreover, Americans vote for leaders (or parties) that they perceive as willing to stand up and fight for what they (ostensibly) believe in- even when they themselves don't buy into the policies.

Thus the appeasement dynamic is a lose/lose proposition- just as it was in the 1990's and early 00's.

Dems end up wrong on the issues- as well as looking weak, complicit and compromised to the point of standing for nothing.

Good luck with volunteer energy and GOTV efforts with that as the legacy.

[burning rain]

35. There's no need to count to 60.

The nuclear option requires only 51. Compromising legislation enough so as to be able to get 60 votes has demoralized the Democratic base, and that in turn doubtlessly accounts in part for Coakley's difficulties in Massachusetts. Even if she pulls it off on Tuesday--and I certainly hope she does--continuing to hew to the 60-votes-for-everything rule stands to kill Democrats in November. After all, not many states are as blue as Massachusetts.


By whimpering about 60 votes when they could pass stronger, better legislation with 51 by using the nuclear option, Senate Democrats are making themselves look like cowards and weaklings in the eyes of their voters--and that's not a good place to be.

[RBInMaine]

26. Hyperbolic BS from the land of non-reality.

[depakid]

29. Based on the record- and what's likely to come, people will be getting a reality check alright

Good luck trying to scold and rationalize with the folks who've gotten that cold slap in the face.

[RBInMaine]

32. Some cheese to go with that whine?

[depakid]

37. You remind me very much of the Clinton acolytes of the 1990's

Same attitude- same "arguments" -same poor policy and political consequences.

[wisteria]

34. Oh, so now Obama's first year all rests on the vote in Massacusetts.

I am beginning to conclude this entire race and the spin is being exploited for the benefit of the Republicans.

[Mithreal]

39. Yeah if the Senate lacks the will to lessen the power of a single Senator

and modify the filibuster rule.

It doesn't take 60 votes to change the filibuster. We can keep it and improve its usefulness.

Rather it seems Dem leadership would prefer to keep it as an excuse.

[Little Star]

41. That rests on one vote is a lie! Here in MA it has already

been in the papers and all over the internet that they are going to delay certification which will give them their 60 votes without Martha Coakley. If he comes here trying to sell that shit he will do more harm than good. People are pissed off enough with out any more friggin slick talk!! We are not stupid here in MA. They already have their 60 friggin votes it hangs on nothing!

Read this:
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/healthcare/view.bg?articleid=1224249