Boehner Accelerates Retirement, But Had a Good Run

John Boehner

Speaker of the House John Boehner decided to speed up his retirement in the face of growing chaos in the House Republican caucus, but he will still have served longer than Nancy Pelosi (18th longest serving) and Newt Gingrich (19th longest serving) and be the 12th longest serving speaker out of fifty-two. Boehner nearly made it five years (1,756 days as of the end of October and his retirement) compared to Pelosi, 1,457 days or just under four years.

The longest serving speakers were in the post WWII era as Democrats maintained a near monopoly on control of the House.

1. Sam Rayburn, D, more than 17 years
2. Tip O’Neill, D, nearly 10 years
3. John McCormack, D, nearly 9 years
4. Dennis Hastert, R, nearly 8 years
7. Carl Albert, D, nearly 6 years
9. Tom Foley, D, more than 5 and a half years

In the current anti-Washington political environment, Boehner may keep the record, even if the Republicans hold the House majority for a decade or more.

Boehner is only the latest casualty of the Tea Party disruption that was first visible in the 2010 U.S. Senate primary when long-term Utah Senator Bob Bennett was beaten, Indiana’s Senator Richard Lugar was defeated in 2012 and the primary lose in 2014 of U.S. Representative Eric Cantor. It was Cantor’s loss that kept Boehner on the job for another term.

And, of course, frontrunner Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina highlight the current lack of affection for the Republican establishment in the presidential race.

The longstanding disapproval of Washington, which was featured in The Buzz on September 1 (Why an Outsider May be President), was confirmed by the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, which reported 72 percent of Republican primary voters were dissatisfied with John Boehner’s and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s ability to accomplish GOP goals.  Thirty-six percent said they wanted them removed from power. Talk show listeners, Tea Party supporters and Trump supports were the most in favor of immediate removal.

It is unlikely this internal war is going away very soon. The next speaker will face the same challenges of how to reconcile the view that winning the presidency and holding the senate requires showing the ability to govern versus the view that standing on principles regardless of the consequences; i.e., shutdowns, is the way to govern and win elections.

See:
NBC News: Poll: 72% of GOP voters dissatisfied with Boehner, McConnell
New York Times: Boehner’s exit, the role of red states and the outlook for 2016
FiveThirtyEight: John Boehner had a good run

Colorado Senate Race Serves as Iran Test Case

A shadowy group opposed to the Iranian agreement and Senator Michael Bennet’s decision to

Photo: Lauren Washington/Oberlin College

support it has launched an over-the-top television advertisement using the fear of nuclear conflagration as its visual theme. The TV buy is miniscule. The group mainly wants to start an online and free media buzz about the topic, Bennet and their motivations. They are likely to accomplish their goal.

There are a number of possible factors motivating the funders of this activity:

• Keep Colorado’s senate race in the news. Republicans need Colorado to be vulnerable and potentially a pick-up if they are to hold the U.S. Senate.
• Encourage a high-quality senate candidate into the race. George Brauchler is the top target, but there are other possibilities.
• See if the issue can rough up Bennet’s re-election numbers and approval rating.
• Use as a test case for possible application in other states with vulnerable Democrats.

The ad is a low tech knock-off of the 1964 “Daisy” ad that Lyndon B. Johnson used against Barry Goldwater to reinforce with nuclear drama the Democrats’ effort to paint Goldwater as trigger-happy in the midst of the Cold War and post the Cuban Missile Crises era. Ironically, it was Johnson who got the country into the Vietnam War.

The Iran nuclear agreement is likely to be one of the major issues in 2016 because foreign policy has a Republican advantage and they intend on highlighting it. The issue was a close call for Bennet (he decided late) and remains controversial with at least half the public. Although it’s not clear it will be salient in twelve months from now, it will be on the list.

See 9News: Truth Test: Going nuclear on Sen.Bennet

Debates Matter: Fiorina Wins, Trump Stumbles

The new polls – CNN/ORC (telephone) and NBC (online SurveyMonkey) – show most Republican viewers (23 million in total) agree with the pundits: Carly Fiorina won the debate and Donald Trump was mostly on the defense. The timing and format of this debate was designed to be a problem for the high-profile frontrunner. The question format wanted to encourage critical crosstalk between the field and Trump. And indeed, he received most of the barbs.

It was also destined to be less short answers and more long policy positions. Trump is generally good at the quick retort and glib critical observations. But he’s thin on policy and credible evidence to support his often bold and sometimes bizarre statements offered as fact.

Outsiders still dominate the party’s preference, but the order is changing, with Fiorina jumping from eighth to second since the debate. She is now in second in the CNN poll and judged the overwhelming winner of the debate in both polls.

Photo: Right Speak

In a nomination race thus far dominated by polls and debates, performance counts. Fiorina and Marco Rubio had the best CNN performance and have been rewarded in the early polls.

Donald Trump remains the frontrunner, former frontrunner Jeb Bush treads water at 9 percent, and former top candidate Scott Walker, after two weak performances and collapsing polls, is gone.

See:
CNN: Poll: Fiorina rockets to No. 2 behind Trump in GOP
NBC News: Carly Fiorina won GOP debate, but Trump still leads: NBC online survey
9News: Republican field targets Donald Trump at second debate

Chuck Hagel – Nice Guy, Wrong Fit

Chuck Hagel was this year’s Korbel School Dinner speaker and winner of the DU Global Security Award.

With Dean Chris Hill asking the questions (very few in that Hagel has a filibuster answer style), Hagel showed his Nebraska common sense and cautious approach toward foreign and defense policy

Chuck Hagel (top) and
 Dean Chris Hill (bottom)

. The Vietnam War was his touchstone and, although as a Midwestern Republican senator he backed the Iraq War in 2003, he quickly soured of it. Hagel became one of the Bush administration’s most vocal critics, opposing the surge and often citing his independent line: “I didn’t take an oath of office to my party or my president.”

His political evolution led him to become President Obama’s defense secretary in 2013 in about the worst possible moment for the administration and especially for a secretary that shared Obama’s emphasis on withdrawal and restraint. After his 2012 re-election, Obama slid into a rapid political decline, running through the November 2013 collapse of the Obamacare website and his approval rating (dropped to 40%), culminating in Democrats losing the Senate in November 2014.

Hagel had a historically difficult confirmation with a filibuster and polarized vote. But, the real challenge began his first day on the job. The sequester hugely reduced the military budget and he had to make the cuts.

Events in Hagel’s Tenure

• Sequester, March 2013 – One option he reported: reduce carrier group from 11 to 8.
• Tour of Asia, May 2013 – Said: Decline of U.S. military power “good thing.” Allies must step up. Dealing with doubt of allies.
• Syria red line, August 2013 – Said: Ready to launch strike. President abruptly calls it off.
• Russia Crimea, February 2014 – Assured by Russian Defense Minister Russian Army would not invade.
• ISIL/ISIS, September 2014 – Supported start of bombing again.
• Announcement – Would be resigning November 2014.

He faced the Syria red line, Russia in the Crimea and the rise of ISIS. Hagel was not the person to cajole Europe to support NATO nor was he interested in reintroducing war fighting capacity into Iraq. Even he knew he was the wrong fit for the moment.

Latest Polls Have Clinton in Second Place in Iowa and New Hampshire. So what?

Hillary Clinton’s awful summer is extending to an even worse fall. Each new post-Labor Day poll has more bad news. The Democrats don’t get around to a debate until October 13, and if Clinton remains on the defensive, the current polling trend is likely to continue. Bernie Sanders is now ahead in the latest polls in both Iowa and New Hampshire and closing the national gap.

Sanders is still behind Hillary Clinton by 21 points in the latest RealClearPolitics polling average and is not yet a threat to Clinton. But the trajectory of the current narrative, which is mostly of Clinton’s own creation, is undermining two fundamental assumptions supporting her candidacy. First, it was assumed she was ready for the race both tactically; i.e., an on-the-ground delegate gathering strategy, which appears good, but also emotionally that is able to connect with voters in an authentic fashion. It’s here she appears floundering with endless re-boots and scripted authentic moments.

The second assumption may be more problematic for Clinton. She was going to lead the party and its RealClearPolitics average is now down to a few points against Trump, Bush and Rubio. Ominously, Joe Biden now runs stronger against Trump and Bush.
battered congressional and gubernatorial wings to victory in 2016. While the e-mail controversy and her stumbling campaign have helped Sanders some, it has hugely damaged her competitive strength against top candidates in the Republican field. She’s now tied with Donald Trump and behind Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio in the latest head-to-head ballot tests. Her position in the

See:
The Buzz: Democrats’ First Debate Generates Controversy
9News: 2015: The year of the anti-establishment candidate
9NEWS: Republican field targets Donald Trump at second debate

CNN Re-Ranks the Republican Field: Trump, Carson and Bush

Heading into the September 16 CNN debate, the big winner has been Donald Trump, who leads the Republican field nationally and in the three frontline states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. The release on September 10 of the CNN official polling average computes from polls since the August 6 Fox News debate set the new mark for positions among the candidates and on the stage for the debate. Trump will hold the center position, with second place Ben Carson and Jeb Bush in third flanking him.

Other winners since the Fox News debate are Ben Carson, up 8 points and in second in Iowa and South Carolina; and Carly Fiorina, up 3 points and onto the main stage from the Cleveland undercard. She’s now fourth in Iowa and New Hampshire. She’s also ahead of Chris Christie, who would have been pushed off the stage, but was allowed to hang on in a CNN feel good moment.

Jeb Bush, who has sunk 3 points since early August and is now at 9.2 percent, could be overtaken by a rising Ted Cruz, who is up 2 points since August and at 7.4 percent.

Nationally, Rand Paul and John Kasich don’t make much of a splash, but Paul is moving down and Kasich is up slightly. Also, he’s in second in New Hampshire at 12 percent.

We will, no doubt, hear a lot of references to Ronald Reagan Wednesday night, but it will be good to remember the Republican debate is in a state – the nation’s largest – they haven’t won since Reagan handed off the White House to George Herbert Walker Bush in 1988. Although Democrats have been winning the California electoral vote by 60 percent in recent cycles and have won it every year since Bill Clinton’s 1992 election (six consecutive victories), Republicans won California in every presidential elections starting with Dwight Eisenhower in 1952 through 1988, except for the Barry Goldwater debacle in 1964, nine victories in total.

See:
9News: 2015: The year of the anti-establishment candidate
CNN: Carly Fiorina will appear in top-tier CNN Reagan Library debate

Jewish Lobbying and Colorado’s 2016 Election

President Truman, reflecting on the lobbying during the creation of State of Israel in 1948, stated: “The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionists leaders – activated by political motives and engaging in political threats – disturbed and annoyed me.”

No doubt, the Obama administration was annoyed by the heavy lobbying of various Jewish groups and individuals against his signature foreign policy achievement, the Iran nuclear agreement. But, the Israeli lobbying juggernaut, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his highly controversial March speech to Congress, suffered a significant defeat.

Needless to say, whoever becomes the Republican senate nominee in Colorado, Bennet’s Iran vote will be an issue. And while it will no doubt be in the queue of election issues, it is not clear it will be salient a year from now.

Valerie Richardson in the Colorado Statesman report quoted (9-4-15):

Denver political analyst Floyd Ciruli called the decision “a raging river that he had to cross, and I think he got across it.”

“Will he see this issue in the election? Yes. And is there some possibility that Iran will do something so egregious that a year from now — in other words, September, when we actually start to think about this — that this becomes a liability? Yes, that was part of that raging river,” Ciruli said.

“But in my opinion, the safer politics is what he did. To reduce the risk, go with what appears to be the sort of the world sentiment at the moment and certainly the Democrats’ position,” Ciruli said.

The question now becomes what’s next for the Jewish lobby, especially AIPAC, which has been seen as highly aligned with the Republican Party in this fight? After spending millions in Colorado on anti-nuclear deal advertisements, do they go on to oppose deal supporter Senator Michael Bennet’s re-election? Netanyahu and much of the Jewish lobby campaign were labeled as very partisan and Republican.

There are reasons to believe AIPAC and other groups will not be overtly in on an anti-Bennet campaign.

• There are still many friends of Israel among Democrats in Congress and their leadership.
• The Israeli interest failed in this fight, but there are many issues Israel wants Democratic support on. It was clear support for Israel’s military position was strengthened by many senators, especially Democrats, in this effort.
• Individual Jewish, business and civic leaders are unlikely to pursue an anti-Bennet strategy solely on the basis of his Iran vote. They not only want his future support for Israel, but they have a host of other issues that are of importance, such as tax and trade policy.

The person who may suffer the most politically is not U.S. politicians, but the prime minister. This was a major blow to his reputation and legacy. At some point their gamble could cost Likud its majority.

See:
The Independent: Israel lobby’s power waning after AIPAC failure to block Iran deal
The American Conservative: American Jews reject the Israel lobby, - and support the Iran deal