A Democratic Sweep -- and then what?

San Diego Union-Tribune ^ | October 22, 2006 | Robert J. Caldwell

[kellynla]

The conventional wisdom (how often does it prove wrong?) is that the 2006 midterm elections will be 1994 in reverse. The Republican tsunami of that year will be replicated this year by a Democratic wave that will wrest control of the House of Representatives and perhaps the Senate, too, from the GOP.

That may happen. Certainly the polls suggest a dismal night Nov. 7 for the Republicans.

And yet, there is one especially startling difference between the 1994 GOP blowout and the apparently pending Democratic sweep this year.

In 1994, Republicans nationalized the midterm congressional elections by uniting around a national agenda, Newt Gingrich's Contract With America, endorsed by 370 Republican congressional candidates. In stark contrast, the Democrats this year have no agreed-upon national agenda.

The Democrats' strategy, to the extent they have one, is to make the 2006 midterms a referendum on an unpopular president and an unpopular war. That may be enough to get them elected, but then what?

Here is where the 1994 analogy breaks down completely. Gingrich and the new Republican majorities in the House and Senate went on to pull Bill Clinton's erratic presidency back toward the center from its liberal excesses of 1993-94. Welfare reform, spending restraint, and a balanced-budget compact followed by successive years of budget surpluses were all products of the Gingrich revolution in Congress.

[MaineVoter2002]

Here's a little example of what will happen...straight from the donkey's mouth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBBE67BqHJ0

[napscoordinator]

Every time I hear one of these polls I am reminded of the polls that stated that Gore would beat Bush in 2000 and Kerry would beat Bush in 2004...and we know how correct those polls were. LMAO



Yes but they were closer than I liked. If we are going to cream the democrats lets do it more than a state.

[sokit2mebb]

if Democrats win the House...

John Conyers will take over the Judiciary Committee and he has promised to launch impeachment hearings. Two years of impeachment hearings !

That is why it's imperative that conservatives get out and vote. While we are angry with the party, there's no sense in destroying the GOP. We'll just have to weed out the RINOS, but we cannot afford to do it now. There could be two more Supreme Court Justices retire and we must not allow the RATS to select new ones.

[johna61]

Another moonbat and his commy-terrorist MSM rag in Ca.

[Crooked Constituent]

We need more Roberts and Alitos on the supreme court.

For that reason alone, a republican majority is crucial.

If you look at the trends of the last few elections, Republicans have been beating dems pretty handily. Since that time, it's doubtful that the dems have built a movement any bigger than what previously exists because they are offering nothing different. It's 2004 all over again.

[Arkinsaw]

My way of seeing it is they didn't bite off more than they could chew, knew that a slow process is a sure process, and that appeasing the public with quick fixes that don't last would make them connoisseurs of the liberal methodology.

Well, you can characterize it my way, or your way. But you can't characterize it as "successful". HOWEVER you describe it the result is that they are teeter-tottering on the edge of losing power to a collection of clown-like carnival loons. That indicates a really, really, bad strategy whatever you call it.

[george76]

Excellent

Democrats Weak On Security

[zook]

I agree. For them to be really serious, they'd have to launch hearings against both Bush and Cheney. I think it would be a public relations nightmare for them.

[george76]

Many Rinos voted for Perot to punish Bush 41...

then we got Clinton !

it is a bad idea to let this happen again.

IMO

[george76]

[george76]

[EGPWS]

HOWEVER you describe it the result is that they are teeter-tottering on the edge of losing power to a collection of clown-like carnival loons. That indicates a really, really, bad strategy whatever you call it.

No, that indicates a voting public that has has a memory span that can be measured in days and forgets ALL the progress that has been achieved since '00 let alone since '94.

It's like panicking and selling because the market takes a dive, when in the long term, the market has shown a constant average upswing since 1915.

All in all, on average, there has been much improvement since '00 politically and personally I'm not going to let the constant "ups and downs" take away my focus on the long term achievements being made.

[MaineVoter2002]

That's a great video!

[pookie18]

Thanks, musicman! Thought I'd run that one earlier this year, but not 100% sure so will (re)run it on Wed. or Thurs.

[george76]

 

Zombies or ...?

Check out this short video clip (WMV). Bob Hope was a good man. 

[Arkinsaw]

Yes, there has been improvement. But Republicans have made these improvements while trying to hide them from the media and promote themselves as inoffensive Democrat lite.

They have allowed the Democrats and media to define the battle space. The Democrats and media have decided what is politically correct/incorrect, what is compassionate/hateful, what is evil/good, what is mean/nice......and the Republicans have accepted this as the battlefield on which they have to operate rather than challenge this.

Anything Republicans have accomplished are judged on the scale of "Democrat values". Republicans bow to that and attempt to characterize what they do in light of those "values" rather than in light of their own.

For instance, take the warning letter that said "hey, if you are here illegally...its illegal to vote and you could get in trouble". There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying that because it is 100% absolutely true. Illegal non-citizens should NOT vote...this should be a given for EVERY party....and EVERY American. But....the writer is fired....Republicans disavow it.....some Republicans call it hate speech.

Republicans have accepted the illegal immigration battlespace as defined by the Democrats and media and tailor their policies and actions to appease the creators of that battlespace. That means you are failing. You may improve things....but you are not saving America from this horribly destructive philosophy. They are appeasers. That is why they are on the edge of losing power.

[EGPWS]

But Republicans have made these improvements while trying to hide them from the media and promote themselves as inoffensive Democrat lite.

Trying to hide them from the MSM?

And of course promoting themselves as Democrats?

The MSM would love for the GOP to not want to put across their agenda.(the MSM is experiencing a big hurt because of their lack of promotion and their bias)

Promoting themselves has Liberal lite, yea, the DNC has been sitting back and smiling at all GWB has accomplished for them....(lightly)

That's why the left doesn't show disdain for Dubya' and the RNC, they are just pleased as punch with what the RNC has accomplished on the behalf of the DNC./s

[Arkinsaw]

And of course promoting themselves as Democrats?

You are not interested in hearing what I have to say which is fine but not worth us continuing. I gave my real-world example in regard to the immigration situation and how Republicans get fired and chastised if they do not conform to the Democratic/media view of it. I still stand by my view and I have yet to see it adequately knocked down. I realize you disagree and that Republicans are doing peachy-keen fine and all is happy. Readers will have to ponder it for themselves. But there is no point in us settling down into a bickering back and forth mode.

[EGPWS]

I gave my real-world example in regard to the immigration situation and how Republicans get fired and chastised if they do not conform to the Democratic/media view of it.

Yes, I read and understand your real-world single issue focus.

I too share concern as you do however, I tote appreciation for dozens of other issues that have been addressed and resolved diligently.

Have a GREAT day Arkinsaw!

[Arkinsaw]

Yes, I read and understand your real-world single issue focus.

I can give you more if you want to get into it.