Today's NYT shows how the theory of bipartisanship is being carried out in practice in GA-Sen:
Mr. Obama has shied away from inserting himself in the still-to-be resolved Senate contests in Georgia and Minnesota. While he recorded a radio advertisement for the Democratic candidate in Georgia, advisers said he would not visit there, to avoid appearing to be too political as he works to deliver on his campaign pledge to bridge the partisan divide in Washington.
The article contains interesting quotes from Chris Bowers:
Chris Bowers, who writes on the OpenLeft.com blog, complained that the foreign policy lineup was a center-right team. "I feel incredibly frustrated," Mr. Bowers wrote last week. "Progressives are being entirely left out of Obama’s major appointments so far."
It contains an equally telling quote from Mitch McConnell:
"I think the new administration is off to a good start," said Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky. "This is an opportunity to tackle big issues and to do them in the middle. And it would not be a good idea for the new administration, in my view, to go down a laundry list of left-wing proposals and try to jam them through the Congress."
Those quotes, however, only provide window dressing around the central question here. That question is why Team Obama apparently does not intend to get involved in a Senate race that could add to the Dem majority. Newly elected Bill Clinton came to GA to campaign for Wyche Fowler in the 1992 Senate runoff. Al Gore campaigned for Martin yesterday. Obama's failure to come, accordingly, is a trifle disappointing.
Obviously, political capital would be risked by an Obama visit. After 8 years of "dry powder" Dems, however, taking a calculated risk here would appear to be the change we need. Since A-A turnout will likely be critical to Martin's chances, merely 1 visit to Atlanta would likely be invaluable. Team Obama has spent field organizers to GA, but the enthusiasm that would be generated by a visit is exactly what is necessary in a low-turnout race.
The momentum is on our side now. Our foes are visibly back on their heels in light of an across the board defeat 3 weeks ago. It is time to press our advantage as long as it lasts.
The fate of EFCA will likely come down to 1 or 2 votes in a Senate filibuster. Martin supports EFCA while Chambliss opposes it. Chambliss ran a particularly divisive and despicable campaign against Max Cleland in '02, and he's running a nasty campaign now. Removing Chambliss from public life would be a tangible means of improving DC's toxic climate.
Finally, I note that McCain, who publicly criticized Chambliss's attacks on Cleland in '02, has campaigned for Chambliss since 11/4. I don't understand why a failed GOP nominee can campaign for a guy whose tactics he disapproved of while a successful Dem nominee can't campaign for a guy who needs and deserves his support.
As much as JoeMentum keeping his chair bothered all of us, that event does not have the tangible consequences that GA-Sen will have. There will inevitably be times in the next Congress when 1 more Senate Dem can make a big difference. Those of us who have donated to Martin and those who have volunteered for him might've expected Obama to make an appearance on his behalf.