Conspiracy theory: Dems didn't want to win yesterday?

[scheming daemons]

Discussions from around the watercooler today.


Why do most Democratic politicians not seem all that upset today? Seems kind of strange.


Why did Obama's call to Coakley simply say, "oh well.. can't win 'em all."? Seems too ho-hum.


Why did Coakley do ALL the things a candidate could possibly do to throw away a big lead? Namely:

- Go on a Carribean vacation 3 weeks before the election
- Spell Massachusetts incorrectly in her own TV ad
- Not know (or pretend to not know) one of Boston's more famous recent athletes
- Hold only 19 events during the whole campaign compared to her opponent's 66
- Not go on the attack until the final week of the campaign



I know, I know... "never attribute to malice that which could be explained by stupidity".

But Lawrence O'Donnell brought it up last night too.



In mid-term elections, the party needs something to run AGAINST. It is hard to run against the "party of 'no'" when that party has no real ability to block your agenda.

But with the GOP having 41 votes, now the Dems can:

- Go to the American people and say "oh well.. we tried on Health Care. We were THIS close. Then those darn Republicans and their filibuster stopped us. Drat!"

This allows the Dems to throw away an unpopular bill without looking like they are giving up on Healthcare reform.

- Run against the "obstructionist" Republicans in 2010 with the theme of "They're stopping us from giving you the change you wanted!"

- Neuter Joe Lieberman. Hell, actively encourage him to become a Republican and get rid of that headache.

- Take away the GOP's planned "repeal it!" campaign that they were planning on running on this November.



Yes... I'm cynical enough to believe that Harry Reid and company are not at ALL that upset about yesterday's events. They know they'll get that seat back in 2012. But they don't have that 60-vote "mandate" hanging over them anymore.


As for the Republicans... did you notice how very few of them in the senate were upset when Arlen switched sides? I think they wanted the Dems to have a filibuster proof senate during this first two years so they could strap EVERYTHING that happened on the Democrats and make America forget that it was the GOP that handed Obama a plate full of shit sandwiches on Jan 20, 2009.




I know... we Democrats aren't smart enough to think like this.... but it just seems funny how most Democratic politicians in Washington are brushing this off and don't seem to be too down about the result yesterday.

[dionysus]

1. we need the kucinich\paul\larouche alliance to save us right now!!!

[dflprincess]

2. It takes the heat off them

now they can go back to blaming the Republicans for the fact they don't get anything done.

And the DSCC can dust off their tired old fundraising script about how they need our money because the only way they can possibly achieve anything is with a 60 seat majority.

[laughingliberal]

5. And if they intend to continue to tack right it gives them cover for it

They no longer have to scape goat 1 or 2 obnoxious Democratic senators as the reason that more progressive ideas never make it into legislation to be voted on.

[havocmom]

3. Not a conspiracy theory at all. Fair theory about logistics, actually

They sure seem to be forever looking for excuses for not gettin it done. One less on the big board sort of plays into that excuse-makin M.O.

[sendero]

4. Yeah..

... that's why a totaly unbusy Obama campaigned for her.

Really, of all the nonsense theories, this one really bites hard.

[dionysus]

6. and he's going to destroy SS, ect ect...

[HughMoran]

7. Glad we're brushing it off and moving on - we still have the WH and 59% majorities in both Houses of

Congress.

[OHdem10]

8. It could be they are trying to protect Obama from the fallout.

and they want it off discussion as fast as possible.
Just a thought.

[aquart]

9. Or they could simply be in shock.

And you can be the stupidest Democrat you please, but don't include me in your shivering pile of paranoia.