Discussion: Democrats See Political Benefit To Delay In Obama Deportation Move

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #227094

2

“…politically wise to punt the announcement of executive action on deportations until after the election.”

Of course. Why give the Repukes another “issue” with with to stir up their base?

3

Well, for a start, because the Dems have got their own base to think about. We can’t just assume people are going to be outraged about what Yertl, Agent Orange, and the rest of the clown car have done over the last four years. This midterm is way too important to just slough it off and hope Hillary Or Whoever brings it home in 2016.

And since the Repuke bigwigs have put impeachment in their back pockets until after the election, I say Obama throws the bomb now, so he can call Steve King up after he does it and tell Ol’ Bug Eyes, “Let’s get this party started!”

1 Like
4

No good advice can come from a man who has lost all the Presidential races he’s managed (Bob Shrum). That being said, I am hearten by all the recent polling showing an absence of a GOP wave and supposed Dem ‘walking dead’ like Pryor in Arkansas running on the ACA. Not to mention the polling is close in almost all the Senate races.

If PBO campaign operation says hold off, they must see something the MSM does not.

2 Likes
5

Obama might as well go for it. The reality is that most Teahadists already think he forced the constitution to have sex with a taco to produce more anchor baby democrats. What he actually does or doesn’t do has no bearing on their alternate universe.

1 Like
6

True, but I have the feeling that the base is never energized because they’re happy their guy has done something they like. The base gets energized if the opposition has done something they hate, or if their guy is promising to do something they like if he’s re-elected.

I suspect that going forward with executive action before the mid-term elections has more downsides than upsides. It’s the right thing to do, but putting it off for three months is OK.

2 Likes
7

Opening sentence:

A growing number of Democratic operatives believe it would be politically wise to punt the announcement until after the election,

…

said a Democratic strategist, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly

…

a Democratic Senate aide, who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record, told TPM.

I’m not exactly seeing the “growing”, just the usual “anonymous” people that tend to show up to talk to the press but don’t have to identify who they are.

But we do have Shrum; who is willing to talk on record. But he doesn’t really come off as someone who supports one decision over the other.

8

Alaska is SOOO threatened by US immigration policy.

1 Like
9

From First Peoples and White Peoples from Canuckistan. They are ready to storm the borders…

10

U.S. Grant always tried to make the enemy fight on the ground he chose. Obama always lets his adversaries choose the ground on which he is to fight. He is too cautious to pick a fight of his own.

11

I suspect that both considerations are true.

An action before the election would pump up the Democratic base and probably be a net positive for the Democrats nationwide, but that it would also hurt the Democratic Senate candidates in red states.

12

The Mexican immigrants have no better friend than President Obama in politics.
The deportations aren’t his fault but it is easy to blame him, just like everyone else does.
The Prez did DACA and will do more and would do a lot more if it weren’t for Republicans. Obama may not be handing them amnesty but he damned for sure isn’t hating on them.
I understand the immigrants plight but they are going to get a shot through the Obama administration and likely have Hillary back it up. Working with the Democrats and making sure that we are there for each other is the wise thing to do.
Change comes slowly but permanence is the key. Obama will get it right.

13

‘“It’s like Lincoln and the 13th Amendment — you don’t push for it before the 1864 election, you push for it after,” said Bob Shrum, a veteran Democratic strategist, referring to the politics of the constitutional amendment that abolished slavery.’

Sounds convincing at first. Only problem: while the House voted on the Thirteenth Amendment on January 31, 1865 (and thus after the election), the Senate actually voted on April 8, 1864, and thus well before the election. In other words, Bob Shrum’s understanding of history is about as valid as his mismanaged presidential campaigns.