Monday, November 14, 2016

Dems Lose 870 Major Elected Positions Since 2008

Here's a warning about tying your political future to a narcissistic star. 2008 seemed to be a wave election with Democrats taking control of the federal government (including a filibuster proof senate) and state governments as well.

However, Democrats have lost 870 major elected positions since 2008.

And having one star who makes the major decisions is dangerous business.
The truth — as exposed by Clinton's stunning loss to Donald Trump on Tuesday night — was that the Democratic bench was (and is) remarkably thin, a sign of both the relative ill health of the party downballot and the isolated appeal of Obama.
. . .
The reason for the “Clinton or bust” strategy was simple: There simply wasn't anyone else. Vice President Biden was a possibility, but the death of his oldest son, Beau, in May 2015 effectively sidelined him. (And at 73, Biden isn't exactly a spring chicken.) Beyond Biden and Clinton, name someone else who looked ready to make a serious run at a national nomination. There isn't anyone. (Trust me, I have thought about virtually every possibility.)
Contrast that to what the Republican field looked like as the 2016 election shaped up: A dozen and a half candidates including a handful of 40-something rising stars (Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Ted Cruz) as well as a number of other prominent voices (Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, John Kasich) within the national party who had deep and impressive résumés. And a true outsider who was making his first run for president.
In 2008 Barack Obama sucked all the air out of the room for Democratic leaders. In 2016 so did Donald Trump. In fact he gave some of the rising Republican stars adjectival names that will stick: Little Marco, Lyin' Ted, Low Energy Jeb. Not a bright thing for him to do or for Republicans to tolerate (if not celebrate).


MAX Redline said...

Well, Jeb! has never held an actual job, so he is fairly low-energy. Rubio and Cruz aren't (although I don't have a lot of faith in Marco).

I do wish the down-drag of Obama had worked some magic in Oregon, but at least we got a good SoS out of the mess. Unfortunately, Brad has 2 more years as head of BOLI, so he can do a lot more damage.

T. D. said...

There's only so much drag in the staunch Democratic and Republican states. You have to be someone like Kitzhaber or Wu to finally get brought down. I was pleasantly surprised by Richardson's win. Also surprised at Novick's loss, but always glad to see one rising star stopped by another newer maybe or maybe not rising star. For the same reason I was glad Hales beat Jefferson Smith (who had a much longer and brighter career ahead of him until his flaws came out).

MAX Redline said...

I have to say, I kind of miss old "tiger-suit" Wu; he was at least entertaining, if ineffectual.

I wasn't surprised that Shorty Novick lost; he just ticked off too many people with his "Little Napoleon" routine during his first couple of years in office, and he did himself no favors with his snide "If they don't like it, they can vote me out" comment related to his street fee push. But Chloe is even worse. Like the Hales/Smith contest, a big problem in Portland is that we never get anybody to vote for; it always comes down to trying to decide who is the least bad.

T. D. said...

I didn't follow him close enough to know why he lost. I was surprised. But, the street fees and "they can vote me out" explain it.