Liberals will now kindly write a check to the party and then hush

The latest poll showing that Michael Jackson's doctor would beat Harry Reid reminded me of an email I got the other day. Referring to a broadside fired at the Senate majority leader for being AWOL on health care reform, the correspondent "didn't expect to see such a skeptical post" about Reid on the Gleaner.

After recovering from the emotional pain inflicted by yet more evidence that roughly 99.999 percent of Nevada adults are not familiar with the nature of the content on this little website -- I've been hammering Reid on health care for months, and on other stuff for years -- I realized that the e-mail reflected something else of which Nevadans, even those who read newspapers and more or less follow the news, seem to be wholly unaware: Much of the American left actually has very little use for Harry Reid.

Sure, it's common knowledge on the internets. But in Nevada, where people presumably know Reid best, liberals' dissatisfaction with Reid is almost never acknowledged. Because...

• The Harry Reid Newsletter, er, the Las Vegas Sun, assiduously shies away from publishing anything about Reid that deviates from the same surface narrative that Reid hopes to ride to re-election (influential and powerful senator is good for Nevada but his high profile attracts attack from the right because that's just the way it is, etc.).
• The senior management and editorial page editors at the Review-Journal desperately cling to a laughably inaccurate caricature of Reid as some wild-eyed liberal (or, sigh, socialist), a knee-jerk, shallow misconception that a) renders it nearly impossible to fathom that genuine, honest-to-betsy wild-eyed liberals might find Reid objectionable and b) seems to have taken hold, or at least is rarely challenged, throughout the entire paper.
• Environmental groups, labor, Democratic politicians and others within Nevada's progressive community, ever grateful for whatever morsels of Reidian largess might be bestowed in the form of a smallish legislative/regulatory victory, the seemingly magical appearance of program or campaign funds, lucrative positions, pork and other manners of patronage and favor are reluctant to say a discouraging word about a politician who wields such political and structural power. That is, they're not going to cross him for basically the same reason Sig Rogich spearheads Republicans for Reid.

Sue Lowden, Danny Tarkanian and others (don't you dare drop out, Sharron Angle!) are going to scurry furiously to see who can say the stupidest stuff and pander the most shamelessly to the most misinformed and paranoid (hmm, might be a connection there) of our fellow citizens -- i.e., the Republican base -- to win their party's nomination, and I for one can't wait. That's entertainment.

Meantime, in the time-honored tradition of Nevada Democrats, Reid will be counting on regular Democratic voters, even those on the left who are less than enamored with him, to ultimately trundle to their polling places in the general election and, however grudgingly and reluctantly, vote for the Democrat -- or perhaps more accurately, against the Republican. In fact -- and again in keeping with Nevada Democratic tradition -- it wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see Reid increasingly pandering to the right while taking the Democratic base for granted (nor would it be surprising if such behavior was emulated by ever-fearful Nevada Democratic candidates up and down the ballot).

After all, it's not like anybody's going to say anything.

Hopefully, I'm wrong (moderately safe bet). Because that strategy -- basically a return to the disastrous playbook of Democratic campaigns past -- doesn't seem likely to take advantage of voter registration gains and all that enthusiasm that was generated during the 2008 cycle. And you'd think the Nevada Democratic Party, inasmuch as such an entity exists anymore apart from the Reid reelection campaign, would want to build on that.

Comments

[Edna]

Your best piece in months Hugh. Why any progressive, or anyone else would vote for Harry Reid is beyond all of us.

Pass voting the office if the Republican makes you ill. By voting for him, you enable him and you're hurting yourselves.

End Harry's career on the November 2, 2010 by not voting for him

[Douglas Democrat]

I keep hearing over on other blogs "Why doesn't someone primary him?" as if we had a deep Democratic bench to pull from.

[RussBBinVegas@aol.com]

Oh yeah, like the Democratic Party in Nevada does such a fabulous job of cultivating & presenting for our listening & dancing pleasure any true progressive who would take emphatic & popular stands and make it very clear to the voters why they feel what they feel, and what they'd do if elected, with passion. Exhibit A & B: Jack Carter & Ed Bernstein, the last 2 nobodies who were run up against jerk-off Ensign, and just namby-pamby'd their way to defeat. Btw, of course those RJ polls are a joke, but god help you if you blog & cross Jennifer so-&-so the RJ reporter who wrote them up, or the wrath of the Banshees of Haridan will descend on you.

[dave404]

Slowly, ever slowly, I put my toe in the water...

Hugh, I agree with Edna that this is among one of your more thoughtful and bulls eye spot-on editorials.

Douglas Dem and RussBB both have a quality scopes on their political observations.

Cautiously I would advise Reid Sr. that the way to reelection is Left, Sir, and not Right. "Why doesn't someone primary him?", as DD asks is an excellent question! Someone with no money and no name could raise hell challenging Mr. Leader in 2010 in an effort to determine if HR is Right or Left.

Oh, an electoral option to make his highness Reid at least show some activity on behalf of the Left. Someone to give His Highness a fight that may thwart His Highness's own Waterloo, his own moment of Cannon v. Chic Hecht circa 1982.

Dear Leader: In your 20 year long effort to be "the leader" you may have lost your support in the state that elects you. Yes, at the end of the day, the question, "what have you done for me lately" is what gets you re-elected. So, considering Alaska brings home more pork than any other state, you have to ask yourself, how will Nevada be worse off without you is the equation that is in the scale of measure.

Knowing that Reid is follower of LBJ and the "Master of the Senate" writings of Robert A. Caro, he needs to reassess his position with regards to Joe Lieberman (who has left the reservation and should be stripped of his privileged Chairmanship after the recess), and acknowledge he does not have 60 votes to ovecome cloture. With reality in the windshield, Reid should do the Republican dance of the early Bush years and just ram the Left legislation through and stop pretending their is such a thing called "bi-partisanship".

Harry is between a rock and hard place; will he be leader of the Senate or will he lose his senate seat for abandoning his base? I have said it before and write it again, Danny Tarkanain is very in the rural counties and is dismissed at one's peril.

Come Home, Harry or there is no hope for your reelection (and that is aside of your Colorado River issues). On the other hand, you should not be reelected based on being a lying some of a bitch for 20 years! America needs to be told that it is broke, overextended, and a country full of welfare queens!

BTW, what the fuck is Afghanistan about anyway? George Washington was so right; stay the heck out of other countries issues! If we run out of oil here, good, it nees to happen sooner or later!

[atdleft]

It's downright frustrating. Harry Reid does seem to take us for granted at times. He's not really all that progressive. But do we want another Ensign clone filling that seat and making Nevada completely irrelevant in DC?

Dave is right that we need to push Reid to the left. Contrary to both R-J & Sun "conventional wisdom", we on the left are Reid Sr.'s last best hope of reelection. I actually don't buy the hogwash R-J numbers (when are they ever right?), but I don't doubt that Reid has a popularity problem... But that can easily change to his advantage simply by shoring up the Democratic base.

[VegasTeaRoom]

Harry rebuilt the Nevada Democratic and Clark County parties. We will show up and vote for him no matter what. The big change will be when Harry leaves. THAT person better tow the line. But now, Harry, whatever he wants.

Harriet told me so.

[KidFromVegas]

And Harriet would know...

[Dan]

"The latest poll showing that Michael Jackson's doctor would beat Harry Reid"
LOL. One of the best lines in a long time.
Condolences to the left for Ted Kennedy's death.

[Nevada Ned]

For many years, the Nevada Democratic Party barely existed, consisting just of the Harry Reid re-election machine. That changed in the 2004 election, where there was a considerable anti-Bush mobilization (behind a weak candidate, Kerry). In 2008 the NV Dems really got organized and clobbered the Republicans, taking the state for Obama by 8 points, and taking the State Senate. Even inexperienced candidates won on the Democratic line.

So why is Reid in trouble? Now that the Democrats control the White House, the US Senate (60 votes) and the US House, voters expect actual results. Yet the economy continues to stagger, with unemployment at the highest rate since the Great Depression, and a second round of bankruptcies looming. Meanwhile, Obama is continuing and even expanding Bush's several wars of aggression, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and in the future maybe Iran.

That's why it's not just Harry Reid in Nevada in trouble, it's Jon Corzine in New Jersey in trouble as well. Obama's in trouble as well. His healthcare proposal looks doomed, like Bill Clinton's proposal in the early 1990's.

The real surprise is that the Democrats aren't in even worse shape. Why not? Because the Republicans are also in disarray. Their local leaders are Gibbons and John Ensign. 'Nuff said.

[Gus]

doesn't seem likely to take advantage of voter registration gains and all that enthusiasm that was generated during the 2008 cycle

Expecting that kind of enthusiasm to repeat itself in a midterm election when we're the incumbent party would be a mistake. The smart advice that candidates are getting right now in this state is to presume that the electorate will be much closer to 2006 in its party affiliation

[Goldy]

"Mommy, Grandpa wouldn't let me eat cake for breakfast! Kill him!"

"What do you say, Jane?"

"Pleeeeessseeeee kill Grandpa."

"Okay, honey."

You don't call Dr. Kevorkian because you didn't get what you wanted from Reid. We would be knuts if we did not return one of the most powerful people in the world to the U.S. Senate. And I don't even like him! He was mean to me! But I am a Nevadan and that comes first!

[Sherm]

As a big-government liberal, can you explain how making government bigger will eliminate what you describe here?

"ever grateful for whatever morsels of Reidian largess might be bestowed in the form of a smallish legislative/regulatory victory, the seemingly magical appearance of program or campaign funds, lucrative positions, pork and other manners of patronage"

[David McKee]

Is that the same "Sherm" whose editorial page is whining today that the federal government is to blame for Nevada's economic malaise? If our own revenue base were not primarily reliant on a wobbly tripod of gaming revenue (down 18 months in a row), retail sales (declining for two years-plus) and construction (just look at the Strip), maybe we wouldn't be running a 13% unemployment rate, just for starters. There's not much Uncle Sam can do about that short of bringing back New Deal-like re-employment projects.

The fault, dear Sherm, is not in our stars but in our state.

[mike sloan]

I am truly amazed at the stuff on here -- it's like a bunch of wingnuts on the right who missed out at the opportunity to scream at a Congressman or Senator at a town hall meeting decided to act just as irrationally by attacking Senator Reid for not being as far left as they might like. Get a grip on reality and check out the red state history of Nevada. Truly amazing and frightening. Everyone is a critic, but few do more that bitch.

[Michael Green]

Ted Kennedy said one of the most important things he ever learned was not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. He also managed to be a friend of Orrin Hatch and played tennis regularly with Paul Laxalt, the former Republican senator from Nevada. While I do not think reason is possible with the unreasoning and unreasonable, I do think Senator Kennedy had a point that several people around here have either forgotten or never thought of.