As noted, there are many problems with the Kranz article about Daschle's leadership post from last Sunday. The basic problem is that Kranz says there's no threat to Daschle's leadership position. But he selectively quotes from Stuart Rothenberg and doesn't note his statement that Daschle is losing clout. Kranz doesn't note that even one of Daschle's staffers thinks that Daschle should step down as leader when running for re-election and he doesn't note this recent story in The Hill about the rebellion within the Democratic caucus. Most importantly, in December, National Journal noted, in a very thorough article, that Daschle was becoming the subject of intense criticism for his leadership within Democratic ranks. The New Republic also criticized Daschle for being a weak leader in December. The American Prospect also ripped Daschle for being a weak leader. David Corn wasn't happy with Daschle here. Bill Greider wrote in the lefty magazine The Nation that he thought Daschle "should go" after the 2002 mid-term election debacle. Also see a Boston Globe story and this story about other liberal groups who don't like Daschle's leadership. The American Spectator also reported that Daschle was feeling pressure from his caucus so brought in some political heavyweights from California:
Daschle has increasingly been criticized by his Democratic colleagues for failing to stand up to the Republican majority and White House. "We've been rolled almost constantly this session," says a Senate leadership staffer. "The leader had to do something, or he was going to find himself on unsteady ground in January."
Not exactly a vote of confidence. The Spectator also noted the following:
"[Daschle] said he's running for re-election, but probably just to lose his leadership position when he comes back in 2005 after the election," says a DNC staffer. "Everyone wants to move Hillary [Clinton] up the leadership ladder, but they doubt she can step in as minority leader. People are assuming someone like [Christopher] Dodd will take the top slot for at least some period of time, with Clinton as assistant leader."
The liberals at Buzzflash have been ripping Daschle regularly. Here's a sample:
Of these three sinners, Daschle is the most dangerous. He is blinded by his self-interest, the influence of lobbyists, losing "deals" that he strikes with the White House, his perceived need to often vote in support of Republican bills because he is from an Ultra-red state, his desire not to pressure Democratic senators, his need to feel collegial "love" from his Republican colleagues, his ineptness, his timidity and his overall lack of leadership. In fact, when he leads Democrats, it is most often in the wrong direction.Forget that he is well-spoken and wears a nice suit. He is, perhaps, the worst Democratic Minority "Leader" in modern history. He hands Bush and the Republicans more victories on a platter than they could ever have hoped for. Daschle is the perennial lout who continually grabs defeat from the jaws of victory.
You get the idea. The point is this: Kranz only reported that Daschle is at no risk of losing his leadership position but ignores many stories indicating mounting problems for Daschle. Such reporting is blatantly one-sided and unfair and degrades the democratic process by depriving voters of critical information.
Comments