…that’s an interesting thought, huh?
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who caucuses with the Democrats, will decide after the midterm elections whether to switch sides and join the Republicans.
He is leaving open the possibility of aligning himself with the GOP if control of the upper chamber changes hands.
Yes, I am fully aware that the reflexive answer here is going to be ‘no,’ not least because Senator King is being so remarkably mercenary about this (he publicly admits that he prefers to be on the majority side of any particular Congress). But there are two questions that pop into my head, here: What is his price? and Does Sen. Angus King stay bought? Because if the answers are ‘Not too high’ and ‘Yes, reasonably speaking’ then I’d be happy enough to hear his offer.
I know: even entertaining the idea is horrible of me, no doubt. But there are three reasons why I am not dismissing this thought out of hand:
- Angus King’s defection would be another blow to the Democratic party’s self-confidence, and I want that self-confidence in tatters and begging for its mother by Election Day. The worse they feel, the better we’ll do. And that will benefit candidates who are more conservative than Angus King, pretty much by definition.
- We need a good Senate buffer for 2016. If we have 51 seats in January, the ’16 Senate battle will be more of a brawl, only with flamethrowers. Every seat we have above that gives us palpable relief.
- Again: why do we care about controlling the Senate? Judges, committee chairmanships, and – as I was reminded privately in email – staffs. Remember this article from 2010? Or this one? The 2010 elections removed over 2,000 Democrats from positions of power and influence in DC: flipping the Senate will not have the same raw numbers, but we want to have as many Democrats angrily updating their resumes as we can reasonably manage.
Finishing up: it may very well be that Senator King’s price will be too high, or that we’ll decide that he won’t stay bought. If so, so be it. But there’s no harm in finding out, one way or the other. It all comes down to how much French real estate this particular Mass would buy…
Moe Lane (crosspost)
Will he shoot? Will he aim at our enemies?
.
Mew
He is a senator from New England and the best one can expect is that he votes against harry Reid. Anything else is just gravy.
It gets slightly better, Freddie .. ol’ Angus isn’t likely to give up his (I).
.
That the “most liberal” vote in the GOP caucus will have an asterisk will have its’ own benefits – twits like McCain and Graham won’t be able to point at Angus and say “but he’s more liberal than I am!” without their primary opponents saying “He’s not even a Republican!”.
.
Mew
He’d be the most liberal Senator from New England we’ve ever had ( even more then Chafee)
BUT I’m okay with this arrangement provided the GOP doesn’t offer to back his re-election by offering no support to the nominee in 2018. The donks aren’t going to take kindly to him, and there are too many conservative activists in Maine to just let him win while caucusing with the GOP.
Switching caucuses actually dooms King to a tough re-election in 2018.
Opportunist politician pig. One thing I hate more than Democrats, are people who have no principles.
So, what you’re saying, is that he’s no different from a good dozen or more Republican Senators.
He does have principles, Gator. Of a sort.
.
“Be in a position to do the best job for my State” is a principle. In fact, it’s arguably the job description of “Senator”.
.
Mew
And you think changing caucuses and restarting on the bottom GOP rung helps Maine how? What if Democrats retake the Senate in 2016 and want nothing to do with him, how will that help Maine?
And you think part of his price *won’t* be a couple steps up the ladder? C’mon, Gator, you’re smarter than that!
.
I also think Angus is 70 this year, will be 72 in 2016, and 74 in 2018 when he has to decide to run again or retire. If the Dems really do re-take in 2016, which seems unlikely*, are you saying they’ll have enough of a lockstep majority that they won’t offer him a deal?
.
Mew
.
.
.
* The Dems won a narrow Senate majority in 2006, and expanded it slightly in 2008.
.
I don’t see how they can repeat this in 2016 because they’re going to lose – badly – in 2014, and their god-king of 2008 was already a wunderkind in 2004… and I don’t see a current equivalent.
.
Given the temperament of their mostly emotionally-driven rabble-voters, without the same kind of “center ring” draw, I think they don’t re-take (or re-take with a narrow margin) in 2016, then lose it again in 2018.
I also think it is unlikely that they will retake the Senate in 2016. My point is that King makes himself untrustworthy if he jumps ship every time the majority changes hands. I have little respect for those kinds of people.
.
Besides, King has gone on the record that he won’t repeal ObamaCare.
The 2016 class includes a lot of shaky GOP pickups from 2010 and almost all of the competitive races are in blue states. I mean, it’s far enough out that unexpected vacancies can change the math a lot, but 2016 is very unlikely to be a good senate year for the GOP. It wouldn’t be surprising to lose a handful of Senate seats in 2016 even if we win the White House and keep the House.
How many “trustworthy” politicians are there, anyway?
King can be counted on to pursue his own best interests. That beats most of the Republican politicians I’m aware of.
We can see that they align to our agenda much more easily than we can rein in a McCain, Graham, Snow, etc. After all, the Left will hate him with a white-hot burning passion. The whole “comity” BS won’t find purchase with him.
The only reason I hold any hope for keeping the Senate in 2016, Dave R, is I don’t see a strong Dem for the top of the ticket.
.
Hillary? Weak, old, tin ear.
.
Biden? Weak, old, tin ear, Obama’s left hand man.
.
Obama didn’t “come out of nowhere”, he popped up in 2004 .. so who popped up, for the Dems, in 2012?
.
Without a big draw at the top, and – I’ll admit this is optimistic of me – with the possible Dem civil war (erm, post-Obama realignment) some of those blue-state GOPers may survive simply by playing one Dem bloc against another. (greens against labor, labor against progressives)
.
Mew
On the one hand, Jim Jeffords. On the other hand, Jim Jeffords. Sauce for the goose and all that. At least this guy is only changing caucuses.
On the third paw, Snarlin’ Arlen.
.
Mew
I did forget about the late Arlen Specter, who was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat again, after over 40 years.
Arlen was always loyal to one constituency .. Arlen. (and, apparently, an all-around unpleasant person)
.
What Angus is up to here is .. anybody’s guess.
.
Benefit of the doubt says he’s up to representing his State to the best of his ability without being bound to the positions of either national party.
.
Mew
Arlen truly was the 60th vote for Obamacare.
Are you kidding me? It’s bad enough that Olympia Snowe was replaced with a clone (from a policy perspective). We don’t need another damn RINO on top of that, because don’t think King-R will vote with the rest of the Republicans any more than Snowe did.
The Republicans should make it clear they don’t want him.
(If Snowe wasn’t the one he replaced, just substitute the other one’s name; I can’t be bothered to look it up, because she’s the same as Snowe.)
I’m not sure he will actually change party affiliation, he’s saying he’d caucus with Republicans, not that he’d join the Republican party.
–
I’m actually more curious about whether or not Joe Manchin will jump ship and join the Republican Party.
I don’t think Manchin would become a Republican, he might become and Independent and caucus with Republicans ( which is the opposite of what Jeffords did) and frankly that is better PR.