Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
I think she should go for something as big as she can realistically muster. Even if the Democrats take both houses the margin isn't likely to be enough to stave off the traditional mid-term losses so she basically has two years to get something noteworthy done.
|
That's the thing though, the "traditional mid-term losses" may not apply this time. The GOP is going to be in shambles when this is over, much worse than they were in 2008. And one of the big reasons they stormed right back into control of Congress in 2010 was because of the push for health care reform drained all of Obama's political capital, and he was (fairly or not) pretty severely punished for it. So it's a balancing act, going for something big might not work (like Obamacare really didn't) and it could cost them the House, Senate, or both. But she's a lot more shrewd about these things than Obama was, so I suspect she realizes going for incremental change in the beginning is the wiser approach.