Sen. Kent Conrad (D) Announces 2012 Retirement

link

He said in his announcement that he wants to solve the problems facing America yet he's retiring from the Senate. Does this mean he

a) doesn't think the Senate is a viable problem-solving body anymore?

b) is tactfully cutting and running from the tide that's running against Dems?

c) is planning to run for president himself?

I think it's a/b but mostly b. He seems to have a fairly decent reputation but being a moderate in a moderate state means that a moderate Republican could be acceptable to his constituents to replace him. Meanwhile, a flaming lib in a strongly liberal area is not going to go anywhere.

When I was growing up, I never understood how my neighbors across the Red River kept electing that idiot.

So, I stood on the bank of the river, and threw stones across the river at them. I missed, but man, did it feel good. I was at one with Palestine.

The main reason North Dakotans have for voting for the same people over and over again is name recognition, mostly, at least from what I can tell. As for why we tend to have Democratic legislators in such a conservative state, well, they tend to get our state money for our agricultural industry. So no matter how much anyone here bitches about them begin Democrats on whatever other issue, their ability to get ND pork money helped to get them reelected time and time again for anyone who voted for them for any reason other than name recognition.

So what you are saying is they sell their votes for money.

Pork gets all flavors reelected. We need to get tough on ourselves first and our "leaders" will fall in line.

Wont ever happen. Whatever state does that they will lose out to the others. Then the people will get tired of being shortchanged and elect someone who will bring home the bacon.

One less vote in Harry Ried's pocket?

I'd say he's improved the country already!

I don't really think that there's necessarily a tide that's running against the Democrats. They just happened to be under the microscope at election time 2010.

I think it's a mistake to assume that there's ire concentrated on one party over another, and that's something that the newly matriculated Congress ought to heed. If they screw up, what you perceive as a tide crashing down on the Democrats could come hammering down on the Republicans.

I'd be more inclined to say that this guy sees the writing on the wall, sees that, at the very least, as a matter of public opinion Congress is to blame for this mess in which we find ourselves (which may actually be more than just opinion). If the guy really has good ideas, he might well be better off trying to work out problems in the private sector.

IIRC, he did vote for ObamaCare, so maybe he's scared that he pissed off all the old people in this retirement state. To be honest I doubt he'd be in much danger of not getting reelected - that's just the way my state is.

I think you're splitting hairs with my wording here. We're really saying the same thing, I just happened to be more specific. The tide really is against the Dems right now although you're right in that it's against Congress.

A Democratic Congress / White House is primarily responsible for the level of outrage that caused the rapid sea change in opinion. Remember that it was only a couple of years ago that everyone was hailing Obama as some kind of new messiah which, by implication, made Congress his apostles.

I have been saying since before the election that the Tea Party / Republicans could easily screw this up by not carrying through on reversing the messes left to them and carrying through on their promises of less intrusive government.

As for whether he's better off in or out of Congress? I don't know. A true moderate in a too-liberal party probably won't get much traction. And if he's got ideological problems that won't let him change parties then that's OK, too. There are too many that change with the wind just for political expediency.

I still think it's very interesting that he doesn't think he can get anything done within the system. It'll be interesting to see how this translates over the next couple of years and whether his experiences over that period change his mind.

The only ones using the word "Messiah" in connection with Obama (that I'm aware of) we're Republicans trying to use the expression as a straw man to feed the fears of those waiting for the Anti=Christ. I'd be interested to know if there were any mainstream, relevant figures using that term.

As far as Conrad's retirement, by all accounts he's been an honest, hard-working Senator. The fact is that unless they are stealing Congresscritters ain't getting rich. I would point to a case of burnout combined with a desire to have a chance to make some money, mostly legally. Sometimes a retirement is just a retirement and not a precursor of some political tidal wave.

You're way wrong. Republican use of the "Messiah" was similar to Democrats saying George bush said to be patriotic and "go shopping." Mockeries, in other words.

Republicans used Messiah as a mockery because it fit in so well with the broad picture Obama's campaign painted: that he was gonna fix everything. By painting that picture, he was effectively claiming to be a sort of omnipotent messiah.

We've had the "messiah" argument many times. There are lots of examples of the actual term being used as well as similar references by those attempting to build Obama up. This thread isn't about that, though, so don't bother demanding the evidence.

Conrad's retirement? C'mon, now. He didn't mention burnout and he didn't mention anything along the lines of "pursuing other opportunities". He said he wanted to pursue certain political goals that he couldn't get accomplished while being a Senator.

You are right about him not being "wealthy". His financial disclosures put hi s net worth around $3 million. That's a lot to the average American but to someone who runs in his circles, that's practically on the wrong side of the tracks.

If you've got proof of your thoughts, though, let us know. I'm calling bull on what he did say.

I'm speculating. I have no proof about Conrad's motives and I make no claims that I know anything you don't. Instead of burnout, how about if I just said he got tired of the gig? Would that soothe your ruffled feathers?

OK, so you won't provide proof of the "Messiah" comments. You believe it. I"m skeptical.

Ruffled? Not really. Unless you consider me watching your spin and not being amused right now to be "ruffled".

And you can be skeptical but it just signals that you weren't following the many discussions we've had on that topic. I'll let you do your own research because I already did mine and followed the conversations here.

edit - typo

Then again, there were a lot of them who wanted to say Joseph, Mary, and Jesus were homeless and that was argument for whatever "plan" they came up with for today's homeless problem.

So we all agree that no one Obama's side actually used the term and that it's a creation of his political enemies! Who says we can't find common ground!

Sorry, you're assumption that I'm in "spin mode" is incorrect. I have no axe to grind either way. You were making one assumption, I was speculating (and admit it) that there might be another interpretation. As Rush likes to tell people who are offended by his bombast..."lighten up!"

I don't think so. You're speaking as though the "tide" is foreseeably going to be against the Democrats in two years (which is why you're hypothesizing that Conrad is trying to get out). I think that it's a mistake to make that assumption. If it was a done deal that the anti-democrat sentiment would last until election day 2012, then the point would be a good one. I don't think that you can be so sure.

People have had it with the status quo in government. I don't really think there's any way to foresee that the climate would impede someone like Conrad's bid for re-election.

It's either party's game, at any time, and to think otherwise is an error. It's one of those "pride goeth before a fall" things. If the Conservatives, both in the media and in Congress, behave as though that the "anti-democrat" assumption is a given, it'll lead to their undoing. The appearance of being boastful alone will wear thin with the public in short order.

No. We're not "all" in agreement at all. Some Republicans (and others) certainly mocked the use but it wasn't "all" and neither apostle nor frontline implied that it was.

You're in spin mode. Thanks for yet another example.

Good point. There's no real telling where public opinion will be in a couple of years. As I said, and have said, if this Congress doesn't follow through on what got them elected, they'll face some serious discontent. Right now, though, the tide most definitely is running against the Dems.

You really are feeling cranky today aren't you? I think you need more fiber in your diet.

It sounds to me like you're admitting that Obama's opponents created the term, so that they could mock it.

Are you going to make me drag out the Willamette Week cover, from when they endorsed Him, again? Or any of the photos from the campaign, where they are framed so he has a halo?

I'll pass on that, because that would force me to bring out the photoshops of Reagan carved on Mt. Rushmore.

Big deal. Star Trek V was going to show Obama on Mt. Rushmore.

What the fuck do those two things have to do with one another?

Christ, Mike, you're such a fucking retard.

Boy, so much for the right wing myth that only hard core lefties lack a sense of humor....

Mike: "Spin, spin, spin"

<Everyone else catches him>

Mike: "You've got no sense of humor!" <pout>

Everyone else:

Now who doesn't have a sense of humor?

Meanwhile, NPR sez