TPM: They're recounting in Maine (is Romney about to lose another one?)

In relation to this mess, TPM (via Politico) now reports:

The Maine Republican Party is recounting the vote totals from the Maine caucuses which mostly concluded last Saturday when Mitt Romney was declared the winner, reports Politico. Due to a snow storm, Washington County postponed its caucus and will be convening this Saturday to complete it. The state GOP has come under fire from Ron Paul supporters for declaring Romney the winner before all voting was completed.

Rachel asks...just what the hell is going on in Maine?!? (VIDEO)

Both videos for your viewing...confusion:

Tuesday Night:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Wednesday Night:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Like I said Maine, return Collins (or Snowe) to the Senate, you deserve what you get.

Susan Collins writes a Washington Post essay where she waxes nostalgic about Bipartisanship and divided Government...you know, the Bipartisanship she helped to kill, and the Divided Government she hopes to foster by worrying more about her Committee standing instead of getting stuff done.

I'm not going to cover the actual essay. Rather, I just wanted to enjoy the ripping of her nostalgic walk down memory lane:

Susan Collins takes a crack at defending this belief in a Washington Post essay. Collins' essay is a valuable document, a perfect gem of intellectual incoherence, for its inadvertent exposure of the vacuity of the establishment view.

Collins' premise is simple: Republican control of Congress would be good because it would introduce divided government and hence more civility and bipartisan cooperation:

When one party has all the power, the temptation is to roll over the minority, leading to resentment and resistance because the minority has so few options.

It wasn't always this way. There were times when those who worked to avert legislative implosions were more welcome. In 2005, a group of senators came together to negotiate an agreement for considering judicial nominees. This "Gang of 14," of which I was part, sought to avoid what was known as the "nuclear option," a change in the Senate rules that would have brought about a legislative meltdown.

A few problems with this thesis present themselves immediately. First, we have a recent example of divided government: 2007-2008, when Democrats controlled Congress and Republicans the White House. It was not an Edenic time of bipartisan cooperation. The next most recent period of divided government, 1996-2000, featured government shutdowns and a wildly partisan attempt to impeach the president.

Maine, she's an idiot. And you're idiots for returning her to office. If you do so again, you're going to get what you deserve, which is nothing.

I'm calling you out, Maine. If you return Snowe to the Senate, you deserve what you get.

Honest to God, a quote from our lady of Maine:

Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe criticized her Congressional colleagues on Wednesday for failing to find common ground, calling for a more centrist approach to politics.

"Frankly we haven't done our jobs well here in Washington and that disturbs me," Snowe said at Fortune magazine's "Most Powerful Women" summit.

"There's all this partisanship and polization," Snowe explained, "and ultimately it yields two outcomes: either scorched-earth victory for one side or political stagnation."

Maine, fire her just for that.

Who's been supporting just about ALL the Republican filibusters? Snowe and Collins. Why isn't there a Disclose Act? Snowe and Collins. Why isn't there a Public Option? Snowe and Collins (and Lincoln, and Lieberman). Why didn't she pass the Defense Authorization Bill with DADT Repeal, which she supported in committee??

Never deal with this woman again.

The President's Health Care Speech in Portland, ME (VIDEO)

I hope this worries the two allegedly reasonable GOP Senators from Maine.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I'll put up the White House Video when it comes up. Apparently, Maine has never heard of the High-Definition Camera as of yet.

Olympia Snowe, Krugman's talkin' about you...

From today's New York Times:

And let’s also not fail to take note of those who had a chance to join in this historic moment, and punted.

I’m not talking about the progressives who have rejected this bill because they don’t think it’s good enough; I disagree, but I respect their motives. I’m talking instead about the self-described centrists, pundits and politicians, who have spent years lecturing us on the need to make hard choices and actually come to grip with America’s problems; you know who I mean. So what did they do when faced with a chance to help confront those problems? They made excuses.

Why?

Snowe Clinches Deal To Turn Logic On Head
Josh Marshall | December 19, 2009, 12:38PM

After months in which the Senate health care bill was held up over efforts to find some form in which she would agree to sign on to it, Sen. Snowe (R-ME) now says she will oppose it because it is being "rushed."

Kos: Whipping The Trigger...

Daily Kos's McJoan has a version of the article I put up a while ago. I think hers is just a bit better than mine.

Here's the Deal on the Public Option, as far as the White House goes...

I'm going to try to explain the White House's rationale...even though I think their rationale is mistaken.

Basically, there are reports that the White House is trying to water down the Public Option to keep Senator Snowe on board. These reports are mistaken, in that, it makes it sound like the White House is trying to destroy the Public Option. They ain't.

To them, the safest path to passage is to make sure that at least one GOPer is on board, because God forbid on the day of the vote, Robert Byrd is sick (as he has been for the last couple of months. I mean, crickey...the man is 96!) and makes it impossible to break a filibuster.

It's a real concern, but it's not worth passing shit legislation because of it.

Meanwhile, Harry Reid thinks he has an angle on getting an "Opt-Out" Public Option through the Senate...with 60 votes...all of them Democratic. Snowe says she's out if its a Opt-Out...which basically means she's only interested in a trigger that never fires. That makes her a worthless snake in the grass, whom I hope the voters of Maine take care of in 2010 (and if she helps scuttle reform, she won't be back).

Erza summarizes:

On Thursday night, Reid went over to the White House for a talk with the president. The conversation centered on Reid's desire to put Schumer's national opt-out plan into the base bill. White House officials were not necessarily pleased, and they made that known. Everyone agrees that they didn't embrace Reid's new strategy. Everyone agrees that the White House wants Snowe on the bill, feels the trigger offers a safer endgame, and isn't convinced by Reid's math. But whether officials expressed a clear preference for the trigger, or were just worried about the potential for 60 votes, is less clear. One staffer briefed on the conversation says "the White House basically told us, 'We hope you guys know what you're doing.'"

Olympia Snowe...

Erza Klein has this little scoop on Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine. It makes one wonder if she's worth dealing with at all:

Word is that Olympia Snowe now wants the cost of health-care reform brought down to $800 billion or lower. That's strange, because Olympia Snowe also wants the subsidies increased from 300 percent of poverty to 400 percent of poverty. Which would increase, not decrease, the price tag of the bill.

Snowe's concern for the subsidy levels was perfectly understandable: Insufficient subsidies mean health care won't be affordable, and the plan won't work. In light of that insight, her desire to drop the price tag doesn't make much sense at all: It makes policies even less affordable, and the plan even less likely to work. Speculation is that Snowe is afraid to be the sole Republican on the bill and feels she needs a concrete concession on the price tag in order to justify her involvement. But you have to imagine her to be quite craven, and quite politically afraid, to believe she'd knowingly make the bill less affordable when she's spent the last few months pushing the "Gang of Six" to make it more affordable. And for what? A vote Republicans will hate her for anyway?

I'd be careful if I were her. She's walking right Health Care Reform right into reconciliation. If she pushes this !@#$ too far, there's not going to be any choice.

WaPo: Erza Klein on the Endgame...or the beginning of the endgame.

Two camps in the White House. One, focus on the package. Make it as universal as possible. These would be the policy people. Two, focus on getting the sucker passed. These would be the political people.

Let the games begin.

This is health-care reform's endgame, or close to it. Next Wednesday, Barack Obama will give a prime-time address before both houses of Congress. But that's not all he's giving Congress. The administration is going to put a plan down on paper. The question is what it will say.

Conversations with a number of White House officials make it clear that, at this point, even they don't know. The argument was raging as recently as last night, and appears to have hardened into two main camps. Both camps agree that the cost of the bill has to come down. The question is how much, and what can be sacrificed.

The first camp could be called "universal-lite." They're focused on preserving the basic shape of the bill. They think a universal plan is necessary for a number of reasons: For one thing, the insurance market regulations don't work without universality, as you can't really ask insurers to offer standard prices if the healthy and the young don't have to enter the system. For another, it will be easier to change subsidies or improve the benefit package down the road if the initial offerings prove inadequate. New numbers are easier than new features. Creating a robust structure is the most important thing. This camp seems to be largely headed by the policy people.

The second camp is not universal at all. This camp believes the bill needs to be scaled back sharply in order to ensure passage. Covering 20 million people isn't as good as covering 40 million people, but it's a whole lot better than letting the bill fall apart and covering no one at all. It's also a success of some sort, and it gives you something to build on. What that sacrifices in terms of structure it gains in terms of political appeal. This camp is largely headed by members of the political team.

Both camps accept that the administration's proposal will be less generous than what has emerged from either the HELP or House Committees. The question, it seems, is how much less generous.

The answer appears to hinge on Sen. Olympia Snowe. "I'm a Snowe-ite," joked one official. Her instincts on health care have proven quite a bit more liberal than those of many Democrats. In the Gang of Six meetings, she joined Sen. Jeff Bingaman in focusing on affordability and coverage — putting her, in practice, somewhat to the left of Conrad and Baucus. The problem is that Snowe is scared to be the sole Republican supporting this bill, not to mention the Republican who ensures the passage of this bill. The reprisals within her caucus could be tremendous.

If Snowe drops off the bill, using the budget reconciliation process will probably be a necessity. The bill then goes through Sen. Kent Conrad's Budget Committee, giving him much more power over the product. The absence of any Republicans repels at least a couple of conservative Democrats. Passage becomes much less certain, which means a scaled-back bill becomes much more likely. This is the irony of the health-care endgame: The bill becomes much more conservative if it loses its final Republican.