While Carnahan’s response to the first question might be at least considered a standard attempt at mealy-mouthing, and thus not overly outrageous; I cannot imagine how any progressive watching that could be pleased at her ‘answer’ to the second question. Every credible side in the health care dispute concedes that the Stupak amendment is relevant to the discussion, and people are keeping track of who has what opinion of it. Robin Carnahan’s going to have to choose a side.
PS: What exactly did the Carnahan family do in Missouri to justify their quasi-hereditary political status in that state? Save St. Louis from a rampaging Mississippi River monster?
Watch this PJTV interview (via Instapundit), if you would. The stuff on the Senate is very interesting – established wisdom this far out is that we’re looking at an incremental shift – but even more interesting is the fact that, when the issue came up about whether or not the GOP would take back the House in 2010, Dr. Sabato did everything except actually make a statement, one way or the other. He’s careful to note that seats will probably be gained by the Republicans, but nothing more specific.
The ostensible reason is that it’s all based on Presidential approval ratings – which Dr. Sabato could at least extrapolate from, based on where the President is now. Which he was unwilling to do: either because he doesn’t think that it’d result in a meaningful answer… or it’ll result in a meanignful answer that possibly may not be all that wonderful news for the current party in power. Either way, no new real semantic content there.