All-Purpose NuILX thread for American Politics

are you familiar with this little ditty
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmifO2sKT7g&feature=related

Had drinks last night with a friend who works on the Hill, has worked on a campaign or two since 2008. He was pretty confident about the Dems losing the Senate but regaining the House -- says a bunch of criminal investigations will start coming sometime in the spring and summer over money.

A novel theory, and I told him that he would owe me quite a bit of $$ in November should this fever dream come to pass.

Nelson voted for the bill, which grants Americans universal healthcare
His GOP successor would never do so

You can quibble about the marginal provisions, but these are simple facts, whether you like them (or Nelson; I don't either) or not.

i do know that song! other songs i know: don't go breakin' my heart; muscrat love; afternoon delight.

i didn't know the word "womansplainer" is in that song, tho.

to "mansplain" is a thing now, so shakey mo is just being clever.

ah. "womansplaining," as operationally defined in the context of defining 'mansplaining'.

Anyway, good for Nelson for voting to pass heathcare (despite his strongest attempts to weaken it). I don't see this administration ever being so bold again and I don't see a Dem senate majority mattering at all in the short term. So his retirement is mostly inconsequential.

i think you're wrong about that part (admin. never being that bold again).

I do, too.

Administrations are rarely bold in a second term.

a second-term obama can aim high, since he doesn't have to worry about re-election. i'm not saying he will, but it's certainly possible (e.g., bush's effort to radically change social-security at the beginning of his second-term).

well, alfred might be right. i'd have to research it some, but you can see why -- in theory -- a second-term president might feel more empowered to push for his or her agenda.

Reagan and FDR's second terms are the only exceptions that come to mind.

There really is no good basis to generalize about the Presidency based on history. There just isn't much data out there.

historically all the big shit happens in the first term, with some very rare exceptions

xp

well, alfred might be right. i'd have to research it some, but you can see why -- in theory -- a second-term president might feel more empowered to push for his or her agenda

It never happens, and it's usually the stick with which political parties beat voters ("Don't worry -- he'll take care of X in the second term").

i'll concede the point. but it makes no sense to me; why not swing for the fences in the second term?

it's more that their parties aren't going to support sweeping agendas in the second term since the President isn't going around to help them get re-elected

Because the president is a lame duck for the next four years?

going TO BE around

There really is no good basis to generalize about the Presidency based on history. There just isn't much data out there.

rmde

it's more that their parties aren't going to support sweeping agendas in the second term since the President isn't going around to help them get re-elected

It's fairly well known that Obama hasn't done anything to help Congressional Democrats get re-elected. They're pretty pissed about it.

Because the president is a lame duck for the next four years?

okay, that makes sense, i guess. gutless, but rational, behavior.

There really is no good basis to generalize about the Presidency based on history. There just isn't much data out there.

You're right -- we'll overlook 220+ years of American history

we need at least 300 years for an adequate sample-size!

we'll overlook 220+ years of American history

There are 220+ years of second Presidential terms (in the modern political environment)?

You seem to have found two rather notable exceptions to the "rule" (out of how many in the same period) without going back very far.

Of twentieth century presidents who've won a second full term on their own we've got:

McKinley
Wilson
FDR
Eisenhower
Nixon
Reagan
Clinton
Bush II

Of the successful ones, FDR's second term was certainly the worst: after the court-packing loss, the failed midterm party purge, and the economy tanking again, he didn't get on with the second New Deal until war was breathing down his neck. Then he set the New Deal aside altogether.

As for Reagan, I give him credit for negotiations with Gorby. The rest of his second term was Bitburg and Iran-Contra.

and I really shouldn't count McKinley because he lived for only three months of that term.

why bother running for a second term?

• protect the gains you've made in the first term
• P -- A -- R -- T -- Y

Presidents think that history judges second-term presidents more successfully, although Bush II will certainly give them pause.

You forgot:

• P--O--W--E--R

SECOND TERM INITIATIVES (RECENT HISTORY)

• bush II: social security reform; energy policy act of 2005
• clinton: state children's health insurance program; adoption and safe families act; foster care independence act
• reagan: war-on-drugs; negotiations with gorbachev; immigration reform and control act of 1985 (not sure if reagan promoted this, or merely signed it)
• nixon: not sure

social security reform

this didn't pass btw

Nixon's: destroy everyone. (Before he stumbled over the great revelation that then you destroy yourself.)

Nixon: getting himself in deeper shit

i know. the point isn't what passed, but what was promoted.

reagan: war-on-drug

a marvelous achievement this is

I was thinking Nixon created the EPA in his second term, but it was his first.

reagan: war-on-drug

__________________

a marvelous achievement this is

― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, December 27, 2011

alfred speaks like a man holding a whole sheet of lsd drops on wax-paper.

clinton: state children's health insurance program; adoption and safe families act; foster care independence act

this is pretty pathetic next to the far-reaching implications of previous term's successes: telecomm act, welfare reform, changing FDA rules, NAFTA, reversing the Glass-Steagall act, Commodity Futures Modernization Act Family Medical Leave Act, DOMA...

this is reminding me how much I kind of hate Clinton

xp

Bush II wasn't a "20th century president" btw

this is pretty pathetic next to the far-reaching implications of previous term's successes: telecomm act, welfare reform, changing FDA rules, NAFTA, reversing the Glass-Steagall act, Commodity Futures Modernization Act Family Medical Leave Act, DOMA..

...raising the top rate by nearly 9 points, EITC expansion, community block grants...

there you go.

Noam Scheiber @noamscheiber -- What I appreciate about Ben Nelson: He spent lots of time making Dem policies crappier to aid re-election to a seat he's giving up. Thanks!

sounds about right

That's certainly a fair characterization of what actually happened. But I might suggest that his intent was to make Dem policies sufficiently politically palatable for his and perhaps others' reelection, and that he/Obama ultimately failed in that regard. Not knowing him personally, I can't say.

Public support of HCR has turned up now that it's beginning to kick in, but it's too little too late for many in Congress, which is why they feel abandoned by the WH.

The WH should have fought back against the Tea Party attacks on health care better, but the DNC and others should have also. Nelson and others who changed it in an alleged effort to make it more politically palatable and then failed to stand up for it themselves did not help in the gaining public support realm

Public support of HCR has turned up now that it's beginning to kick in

lol how is this remotely true, this is counter to all the polling data I've seen reported as recently as last week

53% support repeal of HCR