This is a class blog for the students of POLSCI 426: Congressional Politics at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.
Republican Game Plan for 2010
This New York Times article talks about the Republican's game plan for taking over the House and how they have been planning it since before President Obama's election. Does anyone else think that if the Democrats had called them out more strongly on their methods they would not have lost as many seats? Or were national tides too strong to go against?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(327)
-
▼
November
(40)
- Wolf Politics
- Pajama Party: New to Congress, Many Members Plan t...
- The Palins Ensure They Stay in the News
- Lame-Duck Session Looking Longer
- Crazy Alaska
- Censure
- And the winner is?
- Liberal Education
- Sarah Palin's Alaska
- Miller Sues to Prevent Alaska Vote Certification
- House members use lottery to choose offices
- Mark McGwire tesifying to Congress
- Obama's electoral coalition
- Call for Censure for Rangel
- Pelosi wins
- Midwest Battle Gounds
- Dems shrinking coalition?
- Rangel Is Found to Have Violated House Ethics Rules
- Redistricting Hype Blurs Reality
- McConnell Caves On Earmarks, Pledges To Vote For M...
- History Suggests That This Year's Midterm Losers M...
- More on the Unexperienced Freshman in Congress
- Obama reelection
- Most Inexperienced Freshmen Elected to Congress Si...
- Tea Party and the RNC already going at it
- Fox News, Republican? NO WAY!
- Tax Cuts for all
- Despite Losses, Nancy Pelosi to Run for House Post
- 2010 Election
- New Speaker of the House and President
- The 2010 Census
- Gays and the GOP
- 2012 Senate Race
- A Historic Shift
- 2012
- Welcome, Senate Conservatives
- Republican Game Plan for 2010
- The GOP and their redistricting
- An ad encouraging latinos to NOT vote..
- Up To 2.2 Million People Could Vote Tuesday
-
▼
November
(40)
5 comments:
This may not be the point but I have to raise it anyway. This article is the perfect illustration as to why the Times readership is down to like 7 people and they are going bankrupt. 4 times they mention unlimited corporate money, twice ananymous contributions. They never mention the thousands of ananymous contributions the President got in 08, never mentioned that Dems outspent Reps by a couple houndred billion and only once in ()'s do they casually mention that unions outspent corporations in this election. Way to go NYT, maybe cover the real stories, fairly, and people will actually read your paper.
I would only like to focus on a key part in this article.
"The presentation was the product of a strategy session held 11 days before Mr. Obama’s inauguration, when top Republican leaders in the House of Representatives began devising an early blueprint for what they would accomplish in Tuesday’s election: their comeback."
From what I understand the Republicans, and I am sure the Democrats have done this in the past began to plan how to win in 2010 rather than focus on how to work with the other side and get some things done. Instead of worrying about our present situation both sides I'm guessing were only worried about reclaiming power or holding on to it.
No doubt. Thats why they are politicians, always looking for power. I will say, even though I think they are dead wrong and did it for cynical Alinsky-like reasons, gotta give it to the Dems for passing as much of what they (the leadership) wanted as they could. The politically smart thing to do would have been to kill healthcare, do financial differently, never pass cap and trade in the House, and never even bring up the idea of Card Check. It cost them the elections and probably in 2012, but they stuck to their own principles (or lack there of).
As the article states, “If the goal of the majority is to govern, what is the purpose of the minority?” one slide asked.
“The purpose of the minority,” came the answer, “is to become the majority.”
As we learned at the beginning of the course and have continued to touch upon throughout the semester, this is yet another demonstration of the fact that politicians' main goal is always re-election/election, and in the face of defeat, the eventual regaining of power.
Is NYT readership down because of bias or because of the internet and shrunken newsprint? Is FOX News' popularity a sign of being unbiased or something else?
As for Republican strategy, do you think the Republicans didn't work with Dems because they were focused on regaining power or do you think Republicans didn't work with Dems because this was the strategy to regain power? If the Republicans had worked with Dems to reform health care, the financial industry, etc., which party would have received the credit and then won this fall's election? Even if the Republicans agreed with Dems on health care, would it have benefited Republicans to support Dems?
Post a Comment