* Michele Bachmann says we should look at nixing minimum wage: If Michele Bachmann’s presidential candidacy is going to be the focus of so much chatter today, let’s hope her comments about the minimum wage on Good Morning America just now get some of that attention.
Pressed repeatedly by George Stephanopoulos to say whether she stood by her 2005 claim that nixing the minimum wage “could potentially wipe out unemployment because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level,” Bachmann did not back away from it, and seemed to confirm that ending the minimum wage should remain on the table.
“I think we need to look at all regulations--whatever ones are inhibiting job growth,” Bachmann said. “All regulations, George. I think every department.”
It has often been speculated that Bachmann may drag the 2012 GOP field to the right by forcing other candidates to try to match or even outdo her crowd-pleasing bumper-sticker extremism. Here’s a case in point. Bachmann thinks doing away with the minimum wage permanently could represent a legitimate solution to our economic problems and should be considered seriously. She thinks literally all regulations should be on the table. What does that mean? Do her rivals agree?
* Our limited conversation on the deficit: Eugene Robinson says what must not be said in polite company: The best option is to defer action on the deficit until the economy is off its sickbed, because deep spending cuts (or tax hikes) will harm the recovery.
Whether or not you agree with this, what’s remarkable is how marginalized this point of view has become. The debate over deficits has become entirely one-sided: The only acceptable position is that deficits are really horrible and must be dealt with immediately, no matter what impact it has on the economy.
* Bernie Sanders proposes shockingly controversial idea of 50-50 revenue/cut split: Speaking of ideas that have been entirely marginalized, poor Bernie Sanders seems to think that fixing the deficit with an even split of revenue increases and spending cuts is an idea that should be taken seriously.
Where did Sanders get the idea that the word “compromise” means that both sides give something up?
* Senate Dems haven’t given up on getting new revenues: What to watch today: Senate Dems are eyeing a host of new revenue proposals, such as eliminating a tax break for owners of private jets, in the firm belief that Republicans will ultimately have to swallow some kind of revenue increase.
* Can Republicans accept new revenues, or not? A key quote from a senior Obama official: “There’s genuine confusion about the Republican bottom line.”
* House Dems hoping to influence outcome of debt talks: It may be true, as the Hill reports, that some House Dems feel excluded from the deficit talks, but it does seem clear that the House GOP leadership will need Dem votes to pass any final compromise, which means Dems will likely hold the line against any Medicare benefits cuts, as Nancy Pelosi wants.
* Obama, gay marriage and the art of the possible: Good post by Nate Silver knocking down the claim by some liberal bloggers that it’s somehow unfair to contrast Andrew Cuomo’s leadership on gay marriage with President Obama’s handling of the issue.
* Sorry, conservatives: A majority of New Yorkers supports marriage equality: A new Quinnipiac poll finds that New York State residents support the new measure by 54-40, now that it has passed into law.
Keep in mind that this is not just local sentiment: For the first time this year, a slew of national polls has found majority support for marriage equality, suggesting that while there’s still a long way to go in legislative terms, for most Americans, this argument is over.
* The next frontier in the gay marriage fight: The New York victory renews the focus on an overlooked aspect of the Defense of Marriage Act which holds that states cannot be forced to recognize same-sex marriages — and the legal benefits that accompany them — performed in states where it’s legal.
* Why the gay rights struggle is so often overlooked: Some interesting thoughts from Anne Laurie about how the longtime invisibility of gays made it possible for even “right-thinking” people to ignore their plight, and why it set back their cause for so long.
* Our incredibly volatile electorate: As Charlie Cook’s latest analysis shows, we may not be fully appreciating just how volatile and unpredictable the electorate remains as we head into 2012.
* And Bachmann is about to endure the scrutiny of a lifetime: Good Ed Kilgore piece on the roots of Bachmann’s hard-core Christian right worldview and whether can withstand sustained attention from the outside world.
What else is happening?