The Changing Fortunes of Al Franken, Sarah Palin and their Parties

If Franken ditches the far-left BS and the scumminess, he does okay. I've heard him speak calmly in the past, and he certainly seems capable. (Don't forget that it's not just activists who want to play with the judiciary who want "change"; there is a legitimate gripe that Washington is staffed primarily by lawyers and people in elite and very wealthy circles, out of touch with ordinary lives and people; Franken takes a few minus points as obviously someone going to office mainly as a celebrity [more than because of his politics]), but still (because he's politially aware) he should do fine. As in other cases, we non-libs, unlike the opposition, won't shriek and howl and fidget, but simply will wait and see how and what he does.

The Democrats are in an interesting position -- they are in the strongest position they have been in for years, probably stronger than many libs and Dems still realize, but at the same time, they don't reflect public opinion (so much of 2006 and 2008 was anti-GOP, not pro-Dem) and may be misreading the public and may harm their position if they continue to rush to do too much (too much wrong), too soon.

I disagree with the connections made in that article. It would make more sense to compare Al and Arnold, than Al and Sarah. Sarah is a product of Alaskan politics that was thrown into the national ring way before she was ready. Had the Reps not been in such horrific disarray, she would still be the unknown governor of Alaska....barely able to govern her detached state, but still learning the job. Her circumstances and popularity are very unique.

Al Franken is neither a Palin or a Arnold. He, too, is an 'elite'.

He is a millionaire, went to an exclusive private prep school, and is cum laude graduate of Harvard.

Hardly lifted up by his own bootstraps.

Yes, AR, nearly all our politicians are elites, and most appeals to Joe Six-Pack are disingenuous. Much as I admire people who do rise up from humble origins through personal effort, I don't think there's any special wisdom or talent that automatically comes from that. I suspect someone who doesn't come from money is just as easily corrupted by moneyed special interests as the well heeled, who by all rights should not be.

" I suspect someone who doesn't come from money is just as easily corrupted by moneyed special interests "

That works as well as power is concerned, as we've seen with the post-1994 GOP "revolutionaries" [sic].

(In fact, a major reason the GOP suffered in 2006 and 2008 is from their behaving much like Democrats.)

GD, while we can't assume that any skill set or wisdom comes out of making it in the world without the help of a trust fund. I think we can at least believe that someone that came from nothing can easily identify with people that have nothing.

"Let them eat cake"

shannonlee, I agree with you philosophically, but can't see that silver spoon legislators and bootstrap legislators have governed in substantially different ways. It has more to do with ideology it seems. That is, always-rich liberals (Gore, for instance) will support minimum wage and worker protections designed for a class they have never been in, while up-from-dirt conservatives will vote for pro-management measures and weakening worker protections, despite the class they once occupied.

Good points GD.

I agree, GD- but what the elites and bootstrap pols have in common is that they are loathe to give up the perks that come with power, and will do whatever it takes to stay there. Most of the time that means accepting money from all kinds of sources, reputable and disreputable.