Obama's Brilliant Head Fake

Dueling national addresses are always about contrasts, and Barack Obama got his tonight facing Republican House Speaker John Boehner on the topic of default and the national debt. And he did it through a head fake that the GOP completely fell for.

Earlier this afternoon, the White House signaled its support for a debt reduction plan floated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid -- a plan that would raise the debt ceiling, lop trillions off the deficit, and all without raising taxes.

Thinking that this was the plan the President was going to embrace in his address tonight, Speaker Boehner's political advisors cooked up a heated speech for their patron, one that they thought would create the right contrast between the GOP plan and the one backed by Leader Reid. Between two plans that would ostensibly cut the same amount from the deficit (roughly two to three trillion dollars in the coming years), the side that could sell better would win.

Except President Obama didn't try to sell the Reid plan tonight. Instead, he spoke of a larger plan -- the plan he has been pushing for over the course of the last several weeks. The President, in measured tones, firmly placed himself to the right of Republicans on the deficit, calling for more than one trillion dollars more in deficit reduction than the GOP. And he did so in a manner that came off as reasonable and bipartisan.

So while John Boehner thought he had the contrast he wanted tonight, delivering an impassioned (if excessively echoed) address backing the GOP's debt plan, it was Barack Obama who again outmaneuvered his Republican adversaries, outflanking them on deficit reduction and appearing like the most reasonable man in the room. That's not only good for the President in the next week of debt dealing -- it's good for him in his bid for another four years at the helm of the nation.

NBC News: America Has Osama Bin-Laden's Body

Remarkable... President Obama to address the nation momentarily.

[UPDATE]: This comes eight years -- to the day -- after George W. Bush declared "Mission Accomplished." (h/t Brian Stelter)

[UPDATE II]: The President will reportedly speak in ten minutes, at 11:15 PM Eastern/8:15 PM Pacific.

[UPDATE III]: Geraldo Rivera is apparently anchoring on Fox News. Okay.

[UPDATE IV]: Obama echoes the Bible in his address, speaking of the pursuit of justice (Deuteronomy 16:20). צֶדֶק צֶדֶק, תִּרְדֹּף.

A Sad Day for America

It's hard to believe that it came to this. As unbelievable as life is, and unpredictable our politics, I am still having difficulty fathoming what happened today.

I'm sure there are any number of political angles from which to view the White House's release of the President's certificate of live birth. But I am finding it difficult to see this outside of the lens of sadness for this country.

To say that I am shocked is an understatement -- not that the White House did this, but rather that it was forced to. This truly is a sad day for America.

New Jerseyans Tiring of Christie's Schtick?

The latest polling seems to suggest as much:

New Jerseyans’ opinion of Gov. Chris Christie has dropped 10 points since December, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton poll made public Monday.

[...]

Following his Feb. 22 budget speech, opinions of Christie are nearly evenly split with 46 percent holding a favorable impression and 44 percent holding an unfavorable view. The 46 percent is down from 56 percent in December.

“While some polls showed Governor Christie’s support increasing before the budget speech, reaction to the budget itself is mixed, which appears to be reflected in a decline in his post-speech favorability and job performance ratings,” Prof. David Redlawsk, the poll’s director, said.

The theory among some circles in Washington is that Chris Christie is extremely popular, and that Scott Walker's unpopularity in Wisconsin only makes Christie look even better by comparison. But both of these theories are wrong. Christie has never been overwhelmingly popular, with middling ratings that belie the type of positive coverage he receives from the establishment media. What is more, although Walker is clearly turning off voters both inside and outside of Wisconsin, he isn't providing a shift in the Overton window so much as he is providing voters with a warning of what is possible out of the highly ideological brand of Republicanism that has swept the nation in the Obama era. While many may be uncomfortable with some of the changes the President has ushered in, they are even more repulsed by what the GOP is offering as an alternative. As such, voters may actually be waking up -- thus the dipping numbers for the poster-boy of the movement, Chris Christie.

My Op-Ed in The Oregonian

I write this week in The Oregonian:

Yet despite the bipartisan and trans-ideological support, some on the far right have decided to wage a political fight over Liu's nomination. These conservative activists are seeking to turn Liu's scholarly heft into an albatross, as if the fact that he is a leading legal academic should be a disqualification from service on the federal bench instead of a qualification. They are, it seems, channeling the late Roman Hruska, a conservative Republican senator from Nebraska who famously defended mediocrity on the courts by saying that "there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers ... [who] are entitled to a little representation" in the judiciary.

Indeed, The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder reported that it was "obvious why conservatives don't want Liu on the bench." One conservative lawyer confessed to Ambinder that he was "scared" of Liu because he is "more brilliant than [Antonin] Scalia without being nasty."

The Senate must take a firm stance against this fervent anti-intellectualism.

Read on here...

CBS/NYT: 60 Percent Oppose Restricting Collective Bargaining Rights

Just in from The New York Times and CBS News:

As you may know, collective bargaining refers to negotiations between an employer and a labor union's members to determine the conditions of employment. Some states are trying to take away some of the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions. Do you favor or oppose taking away some of the collective bargaining rights of these unions?

Strongly favor: 18 percent
Somewhat favor: 15 percent
Somewhat oppose: 22 percent
Strongly oppose: 38 percent

This isn't the only finding in the survey that bolsters the notion that the Republicans' anti-labor stance is popular. When asked to choose from among a range of potential ways to reduce states' budget deficits, nearly twice as many (40 percent) selected tax increases as backed decreasing benefits for public employees (22 percent), with others favoring cutting spending on roads (20 percent) and education (3 percent).

So while you wouldn't know it from watching or reading the products of the establishment media, it turns out that Americans are siding with workers over GOP ideologues -- and not by a slim margin.

Obama Approval Greater Than Disapproval in 25 States (Plus DC)

Gallup has another batch of data out compiling the President's approval rating on a state-by-state basis over the course of 2010. Despite his party taking a shellacking, Barack Obama's numbers (which has seemingly improved this year), weren't half bad in 2010.

In 25 states, plus the District of Columbia, the President's approval rating was greater than his disapproval rating. Thus the President starts with a base of 282 electoral votes from states in which more approved of the job he was doing in 2010 -- remember, a very bad year politically for the President and his party -- than disapproved. In Florida, which will grow to 29 electoral votes by the next election, the President's approval rating (45.8 percent) nearly matched his disapproval rating (46.0).

Does this mean that Barack Obama is assured of a second term? Of course not. But given that even in a horrible political climate the President was above water in states representing more than half of the electoral college, he's not at all in a bad position for reelection, either.

Yet Another Judge Upholds Healthcare Reform

Add this to the list of stories that would get more play in the establishment media if they turned out the other way.

A third federal judge upheld the constitutionality of the Obama health care law on Tuesday, reinforcing the divide in the lower courts as the case moves toward its first hearings on the appellate level.

Judge Gladys Kessler of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia became the third appointee of President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, to reject a constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act. Two other federal district judges, both appointed by Republican presidents, have struck down the law’s keystone provision, which requires most Americans to obtain health insurance starting in 2014.

This, of course, is likely going to be decided in the Supreme Court -- and assuredly not at the district court level. As such, this decision isn't likely to have a significant overall impact. That said, inasmuch as the media obsessed over the last district court ruling on healthcare reform -- the one by a Republican-appointed judge striking down the law -- this story really should have legs. But I'm not holding my breath for the establishment press to discuss this ruling to death...

Americans Side with Workers, Not GOP Ideologues

Go figure. WHen I first saw these numbers (.pdf) commissioned by the AFL-CIO, I was intrigued -- but not necessarily convinced given that the poll had been paid for by a group with an interest in the fight.

If state workers agree to pay more for healthcare and retirement as the Governor has asked, do you think they should also have their collective bargaining rights eliminated?

Yes: 21 percent
No: 74 percent

But it's not just AFL-CIO polling picking up the strong sentiment of Americans against the GOP's ideological fight against workers. Yesterday, Gallup released a huge poll that indicated which side Americans are on.

Americans strongly oppose laws taking away the collective bargaining power of public employee unions, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. The poll found 61% would oppose a law in their state similar to such a proposal in Wisconsin, compared with 33% who would favor such a law.

Somehow these numbers seem not to have dominated the cable nets -- certainly not in the way they would have had they been flipped. That said, they already seem to be having an effect, with conservative GOP governors from Indiana to Florida backing down from fights against workers. It turns out that bashing government employees might not actually be the most politically efficacious action.

On the Trump Candidacy

Jonathan Chait wonders if Donald Trump is putting us on with regards to his flirtations with a White House bid. It's certainly a question worth asking.

I'll put it this way: I am taking a Trump candidacy about as seriously as I am taking a Sarah Palin candidacy. Both are about personal aggrandizement and feeding an ego the size of Alaska. Both are going to be rumored for months to come. Neither will come to fruition -- at least not in a general election win.

Trump is a fairly unpopular figure in this country, with a 47 percent unfavorable rating according to Gallup polling from 2007. Around the same time, Marist polling found that a stunning 86 percent of the country said they did not want Trump running for President. But this unpopularity hasn't stopped him from flirting with a White House bid before (even if he was the most loathed potential candidate among the voters he was seeking to court).

Then again, for as unpopular as Trump is, he's still less unpopular than Palin, whose numbers are about as bad as any in American politics today.

Yet both Trump and Palin are certainly engaging to the television camera, and both certainly know how to push buttons. So I fully expect both of them to continue playing the game. Nonetheless, neither of them is going to become President -- it's just not going to happen next year -- so I'm trying as much as possible not to pay attention.

Why All the Deficit Talk?

Deficits don't matter. The talking heads on the cable nets certainly like to talk about them -- now, at least, if not when a Republican is in the White House (funny how that works, no?). Americans say they care about deficits. But when it comes to actually doing something about it, voters show very little interest in making cuts.

Does the deficit hurt the President? Again, if you listen to the establishment media, you would think that the deficit is the biggest barrier to Barack Obama's reelection. Except it isn't. The President's numbers are surging. Even the latest Fox News poll (.pdf) shows President Obama averaging a 52.4 percent to 37.2 percent over his potential GOP adversaries, with his advantage ranging from 7 to 21 points. And what was the most recent action the President took with regards to the deficit? He increased it through a second stimulus passed during the lame duck session.

It's certainly true that the editorial boards and the elite thought leaders believe that the deficit is a major problem. And it's also true that voters say they care about the deficit. But do they really? I'm not convinced.

Indies Swing Away from GOP

This happened a lot more quickly than expected:

Beyond Boehner's numbers the most amazing thing on our poll this week is that not only are Democrats back ahead on the generic Congressional ballot by a 45-41 margin, but they're ahead by a 38-31 margin with independents! That's a quite change from what we saw over the course of 2009 and 2010. The four point lead for Democrats on the generic ballot represents an 11 point shift from the November elections and there were more than 40 districts that Democrats lost by that margin or less so if we went to the polls today under the current district configuration it's entirely possible Democrats would get their House majority right back. Of course redistricting will give Republicans some opportunities to shore things up for themselves but at any rate the honeymoon, such as it ever was, looks to be over.

Part of this shift is no shift at all -- it is the return to the electorate of 2008 voters who had disengaged during the 2010 midterms. But part of it, too, is a reflection of that for however bad this past November was for the Democrats, the political environment today simply is not what it was last year. Voters are looking to Republicans to get things done, and so far they haven't done much. And so long as the GOP is intent on pushing its far right ideological agenda instead of actually trying to make the lives of Americans better, these numbers are going to continue.

GOP Senate Candidate Calls for Placing Federal Judge On Endangered Species List

It has only been one month since the assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords took the life of a federal judge, as well as the lives of others, and already the rhetoric is again heating up.

U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg R-Mont., speaking to the Legislature on Monday, attacked the policies of the Obama administration, defended states' rights and said a federal judge in Montana belongs on the Endangered Species Act for his ruling on wolves.

Rehberg spoke to the Montana House and Senate two days after announcing that he will be a candidate in 2012 for the U.S. Senate seat now held by Democratic Sen. Jon Tester.

[...]


“When I first heard [a federal court decision keeping wolves on the Endangered Species list], like many of you I wanted to take action immediately,” Rehberg said. “I asked: how can we put some of these judicial activists on the Endangered Species list?”

It is difficult to fathom why it would be necessary to use such over-the-top rhetoric within the political square. There are plenty of other metaphors that do not involve rhetorically threatening judges that can be significantly more effective in conveying contempt towards the judiciary. And while it may be too early to judge the Republicans, at the least it is clear that not all of them have received the message that this kind of language should have no part in our politics.

How Does Jon Huntsman Not Own JonHuntsman.com?

This is something.

One step Jon Huntsman hasn't taken toward running for president: locking down a domain name.

A reader e-mailed Shardule Shah, who owns huntsmanforpresident.com,who responded that he hadn't heard from anyone connected to Huntsman.

Michael Link, who owns JonHuntsman.com, told me Huntsman's nascent campaign hasn't been in touch. And one Mark Riggenbach of Illinois, who owns huntsman2012.com, didn't respond to an e-mail.

This is simply political malpractice by Jon Huntsman's advisors and consultants. As best I can tell, JonHuntsman.com was supporting Huntsman back in 2004. VoteHuntsman.com, which appears to have been his official campaign site, is now a website Google informs me is in Japanese.

I'm sure the creative minds at team Huntsman will try to figure out a way out of this situation. But it's pretty embarrassing nonetheless.

Arizona Speculation: Jon Kyl May Retire

Can't say I saw this coming: The Arizona Republic ruminating on whether or not Jon Kyl will retire.

"The old cliche is that it's really hard to give up that kind of power once you have it," said Bruce Merrill, a veteran political scientist and professor emeritus at Arizona State University. "But if there's somebody who I think could walk away from power because he would feel that it was the right time to do so, it would be Jon Kyl."

So far, Kyl has kept mum about his future plans, fueling speculation in Washington and at home. But some local political observers say he has taken steps consistent with a nascent re-election bid, including making a commitment to headline a Feb. 12 Republican Lincoln Day dinner in Kingman and participate in other grass-roots Lincoln Day activities around the state.

[...]

While Kyl is keeping pundits and political handicappers in the dark, several local GOP insiders told The Arizona Republic that they are inclined to believe he is running, particularly after he injected himself into last month's Arizona Republican Party's chairman race, presumably in hopes of installing an ally at the head of the party. The Kyl-backed candidate, Ron Carmichael, lost the job to Tom Morrissey. It was an awkward situation that Kyl could just as easily have avoided if he were not seriously considering running again, observers say.

It's not terribly likely that Kyl will opt to retire, and there's not a whole lot in the article outside of speculation to indicate that he actually will -- or, frankly, that he's even seriously considering it. That said, his race for a fourth term has the potential to be competitive, especially considering that he is one of the few Republican Senate incumbents to represent a state that is even possibly on the map for the Democrats. And it wouldn't be entirely unprecedented for a Senate leader to decide to retire rather than remain in the Senate. So add this to the "to watch" pile.