McCaskill Struggling with Political Reality

McCaskill made two interesting (and at odds) statements about her Party leadership in under 24 hours. The first:

Bob Priddy: Given the rhetoric we heard during the campaign, can the Democrats afford to keep Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in leadership positions next year?

Claire McCaskill: (long pause) Ummm, oh….you know, I am— (pause) My uh, desire to be candid and diplomatic are really in conflict right now. And it’s probably better I, that I just don’t address that question.

It's a little bit surprising that she was caught flat-footed by the question everyone else has been wondering about for weeks, but then again, she's been two steps behind ever since election day. The next day, her reaction to Politico was more polished but no more substantive. Note the jab at Emanuel Cleaver's early claim that turning her back on Obama would be disloyal:

“I don’t think you have to be disloyal to President [Barack] Obama, to be independent,” said McCaskill, who is facing reelection in a state that Obama lost in 2008. “And I think that’s the message that I got to make sure that Missourians understand: that I haven’t been afraid to differ from Harry Reid; I have not been afraid to take on Nancy Pelosi; I have not been afraid to tell the president he is wrong. And that I have been the independent that I think most Missourians want.”

If McCaskill wants to persist in arguing that she's doing everything right, we think she should go ahead and do it. This isn't a PR problem that can be fixed by self-proclaiming your independence, and for the next two years she won't be able to vote in secret like she could to get Nancy Pelosi elected as Minority Leader.

Comments

[TimTheToolMan]

Since when do members of the Senate vote in secret to elect the Minority Leader of the House???