Daily Kos

Senate! Schumer Calls It "A Once In A Generation Opportunity"

Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:38:19 PM PDT

The WAPO blog has a video of Senator Schumer making a noteworthy plug to donors to the DSCC.

You see, for once a Dem Senator for once did not shy away from raising expectations for the nationwide races.  In fact, he admitted that we really do have "a once in a generation opportunity" to increase our Senate seats.  

We not only can do it his way, we can make it a progressive majority...

Why's this important, when you've got Obama or Clinton to keep your competitive-fix happy?  Well, you think your candidate is going to set us on the right track on climate change without Congress?  End the war?  Fix health care?

Interestingly, Schumer says he spoke with both of them. This might be a nice shot of reality:

"Both Barack and Hillary have told me if we only have 52 or 53 or even 54 in the Senate they're going to have to trim their agenda, let alone get something done to change America,"

Republicans, who threaten to throw a hissy everytime we use the filibuster, are not too afraid to use it themselves.  You see, Barack may reach across the aisle, but that doesn't change a duck into anything other than a duck.  Er, rather, wolves in the henhouse into more chickens.

So here's the vid.  

Schumer was just making a thank-you for the DSCC.  But, truth be told, the DSCC is not the key to this opportunity by itself.  Who's helping Andrew Rice, the Senate candidate in Oklahoma, and who's not raising expectations?  How much will they work for Scott Kleeb, or Larry LaRocco? The DSCC is not accountable, but ActBlue contributions to their campaigns are.

What more do we want?  The GOP to fall on their knees and beg for mercy?  This is as good as it gets folks with the last time Bush is on the minds of the voters, with a Bush war, and a Bush economy!  

We've got a fighting chance at switching seats in

Kentucky, North Carolina and Mississippi!

Not to mention the easier ones to balance it out with:

New Mexico, Virginia and Colorado!

With just five of those, plus Oregon, Minnesota and New Hampshire, we're already at 57 seats plus Bernie Sanders!  But we have Alaska and Maine in the mix too,  Not to mention tougher battles like Idaho, Oklahoma, two in Wyoming and Nebraska!

Naysaying is very easy, but the fact is that thats 14 actual seats plus the two in Wyoming, and once you start making some of them more and more competitive the odds ever-increase in our favor.  Will we get to 60?  That's impossible to predict, so stop setting the expectations so low.  We will fight for every seat we can.  That's where honor and democracy lie.  

The fight.  

I will feel no shame or regret in donating 25 bucks and time, and phone calls, to Andrew Rice or Larry LaRocco should they lose, because I will have been part of a war with many battles.  Each battle distracts and weakens the GOP in its efforts somewhere else.  Eggs will be broken this cycle.

And when we're done, the GOP's kitchen is going to need Alice from the freaking Brady Bunch.

This is our test.  Either we believe in the 50-state strategy now and will commit to fight that fight this cycle, or we don't and we're all playing with our fiddlesticks on the intertubes. And doing President Obama or President Clinton very little service.

Tags: DSCC, Senator, Chuck Schumer (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 15 comments

  •  Tip Jar (28+ / 0-)

    For more and better Democrats.

    Republicans believe in gvmt. intervention for bankers and investors, I believe in intervention for the meek and lowly -- Nulwee.

    by Nulwee on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:39:34 PM PDT

  •  I'll say this outright (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    BasharH

    if Clinton is the nominee, we pick up VA and NM, maybe NH, and lose LA.  That's it.

    Forget even seats like AK, CO, or OR.  McCain will do really well in those states, and our downballot chances will go to dogs.  Forget being competitive in states like ID or NE.  Forget states like MS, TX, or NC, as blacks will stay home.

    And I will not support Bruce Lunsford in KY, he is basically a Rethug, and shares no Democratic values, has contributed to Rethugs regularly.  The only use Lunsford serves is to drain McConnell and Rethug money, and to keep McConnell busy as home.  I have the same view about Raimando in NE, we better nominate Kleeb if we want to have a choice.

    The Clintons are corrupt selfish race baiting zero character scumbags. I'd rather be run over by a tractor-trailer than willfully vote for any Clinton again.

    by IhateBush on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:55:13 PM PDT

    •  ... (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      IhateBush, jlms qkw

      if you don't like Lunsford, work for Andrew Rice in Oklahoma and get rid of the worst of worst rethugs, James Inhofe.

      Republicans believe in gvmt. intervention for bankers and investors, I believe in intervention for the meek and lowly -- Nulwee.

      by Nulwee on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:56:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Rice is excellent (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        grigby77

        and Inhofe really, really sucks, but I'm afraid that McCain's coattails (or rather anti-Clinton  or anti-Obama coattails) will kill off any chance he has.  I think LaRocco, Kleeb, Musgrove, Noriega, and whomever the NC nominee is, will have a better chance than Rice.

        Oklahoma is one state where Obama will probably do significantly worse than Clinton.

        The Clintons are corrupt selfish race baiting zero character scumbags. I'd rather be run over by a tractor-trailer than willfully vote for any Clinton again.

        by IhateBush on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:01:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Mississippi? (0+ / 0-)

      I don't think so, that's a dream, no matter who the nominee is, black support or not.  I would also forget Texas, the GE is totally different than the primary.

      I will say that New Hampshire probably goes Dem. either way, but isn't even in question if Hillary is the nominee.

      What about Minnesota?  

      If Bill was still in charge, this wouldn't all be happening...

      by letsbepragmatic on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:03:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I disagree (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        BasharH, Aqualad08

        Obama will turnout black support in very large numbers, and Musgrove is conservative enough to win enough white votes that could push him over the top.  Obama will not win Mississippi, but many white Dems/independents will split McCain/Musgrove.  Also I think many evangelicals may well stay home, McCain doesn't excite them.

        Texas, I think Noriega will turnout Hispanics (which turned out in enormous numbers in the primary, which is why Clinton won) in huge numbers, which could put Cornyn at risk.  If Obama can get 70-75% among Hispanics (very tough against McCain), and does well in the Rethug suburbs, I think he would have a chance of even taking the state.  This could be a case of reverse coattails, with Noriega helping the Democratic nominee.

        Minnesota, I think Franken wins with Obama as the nominee, Coleman and McCain win with Clinton as the nominee.  This is a state where Obama will do significantly better than Clinton.

        The Clintons are corrupt selfish race baiting zero character scumbags. I'd rather be run over by a tractor-trailer than willfully vote for any Clinton again.

        by IhateBush on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:10:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed on Mississippi... (0+ / 0-)

          ...where AA's make up a huge voting block that, to be honest, has had little reason over the last 100 years to be excited about the vote...they will be energized and while they may not turn the state blue, I think they will put Musgrave over the top for the exact reasons you stated...

          Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.

          by Aqualad08 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:42:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I don't get it (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Cambridgemac, WarrenS, Nulwee, BasharH

    The Republicans never had a 60 seats in the Senate when they were the majority party and they ruled with an iron fist.

    On the other hand, I can imagine the Democrats with 60 seats and imploring the Progressives to go slow and move to the middle to keep the majority.

    It all depends, and part of it is Obama getting elected and setting an aggressive agenda. If he does that then he puts the  pressure on the Republicans to not be obstructionist then they should not need 60 seats.

    On the other hand, again, Democratic Congresses are famous for eating their Democratic President alive. Ask Bill Clinton about his fist two years in office.

    •  Many Democrats are our political enemies (0+ / 0-)

      The party is a little too big tent sometimes.

      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - George W Bush

      by jfern on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:26:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is really foreign territory... (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      The Wizard, Nulwee

      It's been so long since we've had a Senator become the President that we really don't know what the effect will be.  It could be that Obama works very well with a Democratic majority in the Senate.  We'll have to wait and see.

      But if we vote Obama into office with a clear mandate (more than what Bush imagined he had in 2004) than I think the Republicans will kick and scream and force fights whenever they can, but they'll be in the can.  And from what I've read, the 2010 midterms will be also friendly territory for Senate Democrats.  If we don't reach 60 seats by the end of this year, we'll get there in 2010.

      But I really want Inhofe and Tubes out of the Senate.  They are a waste of space.

      Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come -- Victor Hugo

      by BasharH on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:53:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm keeping track of the various Senate races... (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Cambridgemac, Nulwee

    ...and contributing directly.  I give $10 a month to the DSCC, but, as I say to the telephone fundraisers who call me every week:

    "I'm not going to give the DSCC any more money until Schumer apologizes publicly for his vote to confirm Mukasey."

    Freedom isn't "on the march." Freedom dances.

    by WarrenS on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:19:40 PM PDT

  •  Well (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Nulwee

    There are plenty of seats that the Democrats can win this cycle.

  •  Energy Smart vs Energy Dumb (0+ / 0-)

    is a variation on this, trying to help Energy Smart candidates go over the top -- putting an Energy Smart core to help a larger Democratic majority move forward.

Permalink | 15 comments