[M1911A1]

If I recall correctly, the 1982 midterms under Reagan's watch saw 26 seats go to the Dems, and there was no war for the dems to use as fodder then.

This hurts tonight, but from a historical perspective it isn't bad at all. In fact, if I was a Dem strategist I wouldn't be dancing in the streets tonight.

[Heartofsong83]

The Democrats now have a decision to make.

Do they accept the gains and realize to hold onto them, they have to stay in the center, which comes at the risk of losing their base in 2008 (like the GOP in 1996)?

Or do they take advantage and run a liberal agenda that is popular among their base but not the population as a whole, which comes at the risk of the GOP regrouping and reclaiming in 2008 (like the GOP in 1992 and 1998)?

Both of them have risks attached to them.

[over3Owithabrain]

if I was a Dem strategist I wouldn't be dancing in the streets tonight.

They've won the House and may win the Senate. They kicked our asses. What should they do - fold their arms and cry? They won - big time. We lost, big time. No need to whitewash or spin it. The sun will still rise tomorrow. We had a good run and got some things done and failed in others. The American public is polarized on both ends and squishy in the middle. Which way that squishy middle goes every 2, 4, and 6 years makes all the difference. This time they tired of hearing of war, corruption and perversion. Fair or not, this is what they heard and they punished those they held responsible.