Rudin: Reid's sunset could leave Dems as party of no

It's hard to make the case that Sen. Harry Reid's decision to retire was a surprise. The 75-year old Nevada Democrat suffered serious eye and facial injuries in a New Year's Day exercise accident, his numbers at home were not great and, for the first time, there has been open disenchantment among his fellow Democrats about his leadership. Shortly after the 2014 midterm elections, in which the Dems lost their majority, Reid was nonetheless re-elected as leader. But there were an unprecedented six of his Democratic colleagues who publicly said they voted against him, and there were hints that the total number was even higher.

That was new to Reid, who has led his party in the Senate since Tom Daschle's defeat in 2004 and who for the most part had a record of success.

Added to all that is the fact that Republicans back home in the Silver State were still kicking themselves over their blown opportunity to defeat Reid in 2010 — their candidate, Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle, was just too controversial. They were determined to make sure they wouldn't fail in 2016. Polls showed Reid on the short end of a potential contest against the state's popular governor, Brian Sandoval. A look at the numbers suggested that 2016 may be a good year for the Democrats. But there was no guarantee that Reid would survive his re-election bid.

Still, to Democrats whose goal is to prepare for battle against the Republicans each day, Reid was their kind of guy: hard-nosed, savvy, partisan, always itching for a fight, befitting his role as a former amateur boxer. He kept many bills passed by the GOP House from ever getting out of the Senate, sparing President Obama the task of having to use his veto pen. He protected his Democratic colleagues by keeping as many controversial votes off the calendar as possible, and infuriated Republicans by often limiting (if not eliminating) opportunities to add amendments to bills. Let's not forget his decision to invoke the "nuclear option" and change Senate rules to weaken the minority's ability to filibuster.

But none of that was enough to keep the Democrats' majority in last year's midterms, an election that saw Republicans pick up a whopping nine seats, and Reid got a lot of the blame. He is not (and has never been) the most inspiring communicator on TV. Perhaps that's okay when you're in the majority and you have a Democrat in the White House. But when you're in the minority — and with a presidential race right around the corner — it is just not enough. The Democrats needed more.

Still, even in the minority, his ability to keep his fellow Democrats united was striking. He refused to give ground when the Republicans decided to react to Obama's immigration policies with their ill-advised decision to halt funding of the Department of Homeland Security, and his decision to hold up consideration of the human trafficking bill over abortion language was well received by pro-choice lawmakers and organizations.

But not everyone was impressed. The abortion language was apparently in the bill all along, back when Democrats were praising it and ready to pass it; only when a staffer for Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) belatedly reported it did it become a sticking point. That didn't reflect well on Reid and the leadership. And holding up the human trafficking bill is what, at least according to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, is holding up confirmation for Loretta Lynch as attorney general. He wants the trafficking bill first, then Lynch. You want Lynch for AG? Pass the human trafficking bill first.

When you're in the minority, you don't always get what you want. Sometimes you have to accept the cards you've been dealt. That's a lesson Democrats have yet to learn. Until they do, they risk becoming as much of the Obstructionist Party as they claimed Republicans have been these past six years.

Harry Reid has spent nearly 30 years in the Senate, and 10 as the Democratic leader, fighting for his party and relishing doing battle with the opposition. Sometimes that style worked. But not always. Come 2017, Democrats are going to learn what life is like with a different leader, with a different style.

Ken Rudin is the former political editor at NPR. He is the host of "Ken Rudin's Political Junkie" radio program.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors.To read more columns like this, go to the Opinion front page.