Adam Doster breaks down the candidates for Obama's Senate seat -- and the various factors that might lead the wildly unpopular but politically unpredictable Governor Rod Blagojevich to pick them:
Unfortunately, voters won't choose who succeeds Obama in the Senate. That decision lies solely with Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a Democrat as dense and unpredictable as the president-elect is self-aware and cautious. Sure, Obama will have some input into his successor's appointment. So will liberal interest groups and Democratic donors throughout the state, all of whom want to ensure the seat stays in the blue column two years from now. But Blagojevich, whose approval rating hovers around 13 percent and faces a federal corruption investigation that is inching closer and closer to his Springfield office, will make the final call. Desperately seeking to repair his legacy or position himself for an improbable third-term run in 2010, it's certain that the embattled Democrat will use the opportunity -- in true Illinois fashion -- to secure some political advantage. Whether his choice will suit progressives is another matter. Here is a rundown of the top contenders.
Amid all the hoopla over the Senate, Tim Fernholz checks in with Democrats in the House to figure out what's next for progressive legislation:
But Van Hollen and his team were ready with a fresh message for voters: Change isn't finished -- send us back a little stronger. And in a change election, House Democrats did extremely well, with a net gain of some 24 seats -- three in special elections and the rest on Nov. 4. To keep that in perspective, recall that in late August, conventional wisdom expected a 12 to 16 seat pick-up. The 2009 Congress will find the Democrats with at least a 256 to 174 majority (five congressional elections are still undecided), and DCCC staffers are hoping to pick up at least one more seat in delayed Louisiana elections. It will be the largest Democratic majority since 1992.
The House Democrats have proven themselves one of the strongest political operations in Washington. But assessing the results of the 2008 elections requires more than looking at the performance of individual candidates; how those candidates have changed the caucus will shape the legislative agenda in 2009 -- and the Democrats' plans for keeping their majority in 2010.
And Robert Borosage and Stanley B. Greenberg explain a poll that shows we're a center-left, not center-right nation:
The scope of Barack Obama's sweeping victory hasn't yet registered in much of the media. Conservatives and Republicans have responded to defeat with one constant refrain: they can take solace in the fact that America is a "center right" nation. That reality means defeat is only temporary, its causes largely transitory. The losses this time are attributed to Bush's many failures, from Iraq to the economy (the explanation varies from faction to faction).
But election 2008 was not simply a testament to the remarkable candidacy of Barack Obama, nor a product of Bush's catastrophic presidency. Rather, the results suggest that this may not simply be a change election but a sea-change election. An extended election-night survey undertaken by Democracy Corps and the Campaign for America's Future suggests that we may be witness to the emergence of a new progressive majority, that contrary to conservatives' claims, America is now a center-left nation.
As always, subscribe to our RSS feed to receive our articles as soon as they are published.
--The Editors
