×
- In light of new polls showing an undeniable downward trend in Barack Obama's approval ratings, Greg Sargent picks apart the numbers to ask whether the Obama "brand" itself has taken a hit. Taking a less scientific approach, Dan Balz sits in on a focus group and concludes that while skepticism and unease are affecting short term perceptions, a more durable "bond" has taken root with some voters. Finally, Eric Kleefeld gives us another reason to treat Scott Rasmussen's polling dubiously.
- Health care reform roundup: Medical problems are responsible for 62 percent of all personal bankruptcies in America; Harry Reid isn't going to be bullied by Mike Enzi; House Republicans introduce their own reform bill without any input from the GOP leadership; and why Max Baucus needed Ted Kennedy.
- I think Conor Friedersdorf is being hasty when he suggests that Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein are calling for "radical" reforms of the U.S. government. I get the idea that the Constitution was designed to resist rapid change, but the whole story is a bit more complicated than that. Besides, When Yglesias talks about "abolishing" the Senate, what he's actually talking about is reforming Senate procedure, which is a rule change, not a radical alteration of our founding document.
- Mike Tomasky makes the case that Blue Dog Democrats actually have less to fear from their district's constituents than is commonly believed, noting that most of them easily won re-election despite hailing from districts that John McCain won last year. Meanwhile, Hendrick Hertzberg argues that Barack Obama ought to sick Bill Clinton on the Blue Dogs to get them behind the president's agenda.
- Remainders: Senate Democrats introduce a bill prohibiting the "sport" of aerial hunting; National Review needs to purge the
Birchersbirthers; and Eric Cantor lies, The Washington Post reports.
--Mori Dinauer
