Me on Fox News yesterday discussion ACA/Obamacare and President Obama's Leadership

[reACTIONary]

96. If, he's wrong on the analysis....

... you don't have to worry about his motives, just point out how he is wrong. If he is right on the analysis, you don't have to worry about his motives either. In other words, his motives aren't very relevant.

As far as whether or not the teabillies have been weakened by their recent defeat, it depends on the circumstances and the issue. Strength in a negotiation is your best alternative to what is being offered. In the recent case, the teabillies best alternative was being blamed for the total destruction of the US and world economy. Verses the status quo.

Given their best alternative, they were in a pretty weak position. And they did damage themselves. But that doesn't mean they are weak given other issues and alternatives.

For instance, take comprehensive immigration reform. The house teabillies best alternative to accepting a liberal/progressive policy would be the status quo. For them, that's not too bad. Accepting a liberal/progressive reform, however, would hurt them in their districts. So any policy proposal that would overcome their "veto" would have to be very attractive to "establishment republicans" who are more worried about business interests being able to hire cheap labor. So liberal/progressive policy gains are not out of the question, but won't be possible without some creative legislative craft-work.