tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8049100705786633064.post3962539507794947770..comments2024-01-20T02:06:45.388-08:00Comments on The Political Omnivore: The Nukular Option: Reid Gets Rid Of Part Of The Senate FilibusterUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8049100705786633064.post-39254198024592685382013-11-26T07:46:19.992-08:002013-11-26T07:46:19.992-08:00I tend to agree. Memory is short (on both sides of...I tend to agree. Memory is short (on both sides of the divide), and over not very much time, voters drift to the party 'fundamentals' as you say. <br />Interesting comment re "In order to suffer Brand Damage...". Will have to keep that thought in mind as I observe the political world.<br />Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15512098310504652381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8049100705786633064.post-81591264020595409052013-11-25T12:41:28.331-08:002013-11-25T12:41:28.331-08:00I posted a reply--but not sure what happened to it...I posted a reply--but not sure what happened to it.<br /><br />The answer boils down to a couple of things:<br />(a) Which election? 2014 or 2016? What happens today will be FAR more important in 2014. As Obama will not be on the ticket in 2016 the echoes of today will be very different.<br /><br />(b) Over time--and I will take 48 hours to 60 days--elections tend to revert to their fundamentals. This means things like "incumbents tend to win" and "the state of the economy is the key indicator for the president." Both of these were true in 2012 and were, arguably, the deciding factors.<br /><br />(c) That said, it is possible to suffer 'brand damage.' It is undeniable that the Tea Party has suffered damage. The Republicans have. Obama probably has. In order to suffer Brand Damage the 'event' must play into your narrative--the publicly accepted narrative in a way that "sticks."<br /><br />This is why Obama-Is-A-Socialist didn't play well (and, therefore, why You-Didn't-Build-That didn't make a dent). Obama's 'brand'--his general public image--is not as a communist or anti-business crusader. Oh, sure, a lot of people believe he's both--but they are *already* voting 'R.'<br /><br />The question is whether people who might be on the fence will have decided that maybe the R's can't be allowed to govern (the shutdown) or the D's 'good intentions' will destroy everything they touch (Obamacare meltdown). If some of this sticks it'll have an impact but it may not be a large one.<br /><br />Finally, <br />(d) Polls show that 'Tea Party' is a negative descriptor in a state-wide or national election. Unless that dramatically changes it'll haunt Ted Cruz in 2016. The question will be whether candidates can adopt enough TP positions to bring the base while not quite carrying the flag. Scott Walker could maybe do this. Rick Perry too was, to quote Don Henley "Sane enough to be crazy."<br /><br />I think we'll see judicious use of the Tea Party label in 2014 and a candidate who isn't totally engulfed in them in 2016.<br /><br />So basically, no: the ramifications of what happens today will be minor and there will be moves to limit what is said in the future. Unless the 'civil war' continues or some additional nonsense happens in mid-to-late 2014 I think it'll be a fundamentals election (which means look to the political scientists to run the numbers).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8049100705786633064.post-6308016817503234722013-11-24T14:15:19.712-08:002013-11-24T14:15:19.712-08:00Don't you think there will be any election-tim...Don't you think there will be any election-time fall out from the government shutdown (etc) fiasco, re voter disaffection with the increasingly irrational and uncompromising, burn-all-bridges posture of the 'tea-party' (or other) candidates put forward by the GOP?Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15512098310504652381noreply@blogger.com