Everybody Knows John Lynch

Not "Politically Damaged..." (4.00 / 4)

IMHO, Judd Gregg will not be "politically damaged" by this episode -- he will be strengthened by it.  I can't imagine one Republican, regardless of philosophy or wingship, who wouldn't vote for Gregg because he was "offered" and "considered" but then "turned down" Barack Obama's offer, if that is the case.  I can imagine a number of swing voters -- those whom each party needs in 2010 -- being somewhat impressed that Barack Obama considered Gregg.  

Remember, our dilemma in 2010 will be that Barack Obama isn't on our ballot.  But if Judd Gregg does run again, he has in his pocket an "offer" from January of 2009.  Not something to easily dismiss.  If John McCain was Prez and had offered a similar appointment to Jeanne Shaheen but she turned it down, I doubt that would have hurt her status, and might have helped it.  

I'm hoping Gregg won't become Commerce Secretary and be in the White House Cabinet. I don't want him there.  I had no thought when I voted for Obama/Biden this past November that I'd be putting Judd Gregg into a Cabinet position.  But I remain concerned -- again IMHO -- that all that this "episode" has done is honor a man who shouldn't be our Senator either, making him a bit more difficult to beat in 2010 should that be our need.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Fri Jan 30, 2009 at 20:45:39 PM CST

A flipside to that... (0.00 / 0)

I agree with the analysis that Gregg could be helped by this incident, but I also feel that this is a double-edged sword. Just the simple fact that Obama considered Gregg may not be a popular issue in some republican circles. These voters, who I think may make up a decent part of the base, may think that the simple fact that Gregg was considered/offered the job by a librul, may not bode well for Gregg. I know that Gregg will have a new talking point that may appeal to moderates if he stays, but I think it will be easily trumped by the facts/Gregg's record.

res severa verum gaudia

---

by: lawduck @ Fri Jan 30, 2009 at 21:42:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

True, the man with too many consonants should not have been elected (0.00 / 0)

in 2004 and needs to be replaced in 2010.  Beating him is not likely to fix what's wrong with him.

What there is now is a rumor of an offer of a new job--another example of the peter principle at work?

After twenty-five years of deregulation, what is it the Secretary of Commerce actually does?  Perhaps, if the rumor has any basis in fact, it's simply to send a signal that re-regulation of trucking and the air lines and the rail roads is not on the agenda, at the present time.  That's probably welcome news to sectors that are mostly tanking.

---

by: hannah @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 04:01:41 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Correction: most people know John Lynch. (4.00 / 3)

CQ knows Jim Lynch.

The article has been up for at least six hours, probably closer to seven or eight, and CQ is usually pretty good.

--
"Act as if ye have faith and faith shall be given to you." -Aaron Sorkin

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Fri Jan 30, 2009 at 21:57:16 PM CST

Lynch is negotiating with Gregg over his replacement? What the.... (4.00 / 3)

Shades of Rod Blogoyevich!   I sure hope Patrick Fitzgerald doesn't have tapes of those discussions!  ;-)

I agree with Jim Splaine that this offer doesn't damage Gregg, and maybe helps him a little if he ultimately turns it down. Republican voters are not going to desert him for his Democratic challenger in '10, but some of the Undeclareds will read a cabinet seat offer from Obama as evidence of his moderateness and seriousness and vote for him as a consequence.

---

by: Michael Marsh @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 06:05:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I disagree with you and Jim here. (4.00 / 1)

If Gregg gets an offer and declines, or if he doesn't get the offer:

* undeclareds will not remember it, and Gregg can't really campaign on it.

* base voter no compromise Republicans will not forget it - ever, as they haven't forgotten the bailout leadership.

You and Jim are absolutely right that it's the undeclareds that will decide the election, not one portion of an decreasingly smaller GOP base.  But I think this episode will perist in the former, and not in the latter.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 06:34:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

But... (4.00 / 1)

...What happens afterwards?

If the recovery effort is rocky - and it probably will be - Gregg can keep saying more in sorrow than in anger, "Gee. That's not how I would have handled it..."

---

by: elwood @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 06:47:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Oy. Typos everywhere. (0.00 / 0)

This:

You and Jim are absolutely right that it's the undeclareds that will decide the election, not one portion of an decreasingly smaller GOP base.  But I think this episode will perist in the former, and not in the latter.

Should read:

You and Jim are absolutely right that it's the undeclareds that will decide the election, not one portion of an decreasingly smaller GOP base.  But I think this episode will persist in the latter, and not in the former.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 07:04:02 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Republicans Ain't Dumb... (4.00 / 3)

No matter what way you look at it or say it Dean, Republicans ain't dumb.  We might sometimes wish they were, but they're smart little critters.  

They might have "punished" Senator Bob Smith for his toying with leaving his NH Republican roots to run for President -- enough deserted Smith to support John Sununu in a primary.

But do we think more than a handful of Republicans would vote for Paul Hodes/John Lynch/Carol Shea-Porter/Kathy Sullivan/Dean Barker/Maggie Hassan/Burt Cohen/Katrina Swett or whomever over Judd Gregg in 2010 to "punish" him, if it comes down to that, because he stood up to a Democratic President and said "no" to joining his cabinet in 2009?

The way I've seen Democrats praising this "great choice for New Hampshire" on WMUR and The Onion Leader these past couple of days, the more I'm convinced we haven't thought this through.  He's got to be smiling a lot with so many Democrats saying we're proud of our Republican United States Senator.  

IMHO, promoting Judd Gregg to Commerce Secretary isn't "good for New Hampshire," and the chatter praising him certainly hasn't been good for Democrats.  These have been a great few days for the man.  He couldn't be happier.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 08:49:35 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Yeah, one word (0.00 / 0)

Primary Challenger.

Oops. Two. But you get my point.

On the other hand, I wouldn't put it past Judd to play this game to up his cred. Rahm v. Gregg is not a sure win for Rahm -- they are both masters of the Machivellian.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 10:12:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

What Dems were praising him? (0.00 / 0)

The Manchester crowd that named the bridge after him, I assume.

---

by: elwood @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 10:34:42 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Bradley v. Stephens (0.00 / 0)

There is a lot of hurt feelings between those two. I had read many a post from Stephens' supporters and the "wailing Wenldeboes" that they would NEVER vote for Jeb the RINO/liar.

I have no data. Spin to taste.

www.KusterforCongress.com - www.paulhodesforsenate.com

www.nikitsongas.com - www.devalpatrick.com

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 11:11:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

all over the tubes (4.00 / 1)

people are looking at Dudd as a moderate, based on his voting record THIS Congress. That's all they're looking at. Read some of the comments at HuffPo.

This is helping him.  

---

by: susanthe @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 07:28:35 AM CST

That's because Nate Silver has near (0.00 / 0)

pontifical status among his readers. While I like reading him, I think he's sometimes wrong on state level stuff in NH.

Kagro X counters the blog-spin here.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 07:31:37 AM CST

[ Parent ]

No way it doesn't help Judd (4.00 / 2)

I am reminded when, during the Bush bailout negotiations, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said "New Hampshire is lucky to have Judd Gregg in the Senate." Now being genuinely considered for Commerce clearly enhances his bipartisan image (which is of course not accurate). No way does this not help Gregg.

All eyes may soon be on Lynch and what he does may affect his career as party standard bearer. Because even though Republicans know we won, not all Democrats seem yet to understand.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 09:52:04 AM CST

Who appointed Lynch (4.00 / 1)

the "party standard bearer?"

Lynch will stand near it, but he won't carry it. Besides Burt, there is a "new" girl in town. One that will happily carry it for many a term to come.

You, and a few others, are trying to strap Lynch with a fiduciary he doesn't want. Good luck with that.

www.KusterforCongress.com - www.paulhodesforsenate.com

www.nikitsongas.com - www.devalpatrick.com

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 11:19:16 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Ahem. (4.00 / 1)

When you run for the Democratic nomination for Governor, you are asking for the job of party standard bearer.  

---

by: elwood @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 12:36:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And (0.00 / 0)

You get it.

Do your duty, gov.

---

by: JimC @ Sat Jan 31, 2009 at 21:39:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]