Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Food for Thought

What will happen if Hugh Hewitt is correct, and the Democrats have crested for 2006 ?
Suppose the Republicans, despite the execrable Mr. Foley; despite Bob Woodward and the best efforts of the East Coast media . . . despite everything -- manage to hold on to both houses of Congress ? The Senate, right now, looks in more trouble than the House of Representatives, but just assume with me, for a moment, that the Elephant dodges the bullet.
I tend to be more of a pessimist than Mr. Hewitt. But it would be such fun for him to be right.
If the toast lands on the carpet jelly-side up, what will the Lefties do then ? Can they possibly get angrier than they are already ?

8 comments:

Andrewdb said...

What happens then? The R's claim it is a mandate and, among other things, Iraq is great, and immigration is all fine and dandy.

El Jefe Maximo said...

Well, of course (at least as to the first two). It's ALWAYS a mandate when you win, and you win even when you lost. I should think that was all pretty obvious. I want to know what the Left does if this comes to pass. . .

louielouie said...

i don't know much about politics or anything like that, but what i find amazing is how HH casts this positive spin on the elephant party while referencing of all races the conneticut(sp) race.
just happy that lamont is getting beat, but look at the elephant candidate's numbers. out of all the people in that state can the pacaderm party not find a viable candidate. yeah, yeah, the jooo guy is a moderate. but that should be embarassing for the pacaderm.
i don't know if the lefties will get madder, but i do think it will be a "refined madness".
maybe a "redefined madness".
i got nothing.
that toast jelly side up was a good one.
i am still of the opinion that congress is in control of the repulikrats.
one big mess in the middle.
two isles.
conservatives on the right.
leftis, well, on the left.
you guys are commenting about something along the morphing of the politicos over at chester i think.
man, the tigers are giving the a's a spanking on nat'l tv.

El Jefe Maximo said...

I saw Chester's post..and read that piece he links to, and it dovetails with something I've been thinking for awhile. Might comment further if I have the time.

The reason you get the "One Big Mess" in the middle -- and the "Republikrats," or however you spell it is that this country is too damn big. Sometimes, I really think we'd all be happier with three countries.

300 million people, and regional issues that are alive and kicking. Go over to the New America Foundation website and check out some of Michael Lind's articles on this subject. He's a liberal...but mighty sharp just the same.

Eagle1 said...

What happens next?

More denial of reality. Calls for "revolution" and other such nonsense.

louielouie said...

i'll go to the website at your recommendation, but first i must disagree with your observation.
the obvious:
when our founding fathers brought forth the nation they had to decide whether to compromise on slavery or bring forth the nation. they brought forth the nation. throughout our history we have come together, fought & killed our kinsman, and displayed tremendous bigotry as well as racism. throughout this our communication is nowhere near what it is now.
the example:
a hogepoge if you will.
correct me if i am wrong.
in texas you have 31 state senators.
in oklahoma we have 48 state senators.
even though the senate is not based on population the equivalent state senate in oklahoma should be 6 state senators.
in oklahoma we will be voting on a measure this 11/7 that will allow liquor stores to be open on election days, a subject very near and dear to my heart & income, the reason we must be closed i will not delve into at this time, however, if in oklahoma we went to the polls falling down drunk we could not do worse than those we currently have in OKC.
my point:
and the source of my disagreement with your observation.
as a nation we will do just fine if we, the electorate, actually hold our elected reprentatives accountable to ourselves. the US senate, the most exclusive country club in the world, is accountable to those that finance their respective re-elections. the electorate is merely a nuisance. and is treated as such. to be elected senator from the state of kalifornia, you could run a small country for a couple of years on the finances required to be elected.
my conclusion:
i am idealist.
and jacksonian.
the problems may be complex.
the solutions, i believe, are simple.
oh what the hell, i run a liquor store.
what the hell do i know?

Barry said...

I may look like a big fool in Nov. but I have commented on other blogs that I think that the "R"'s will dodge the bullet. If I'm gonna look foolish there I might as well look foolish here :grin:

I think that the "Dems" will do a little soul-searching and decide to move to the middle.

Mike's America said...

I'd like to think HH is right. And President Bush was showing sincere confidence at his press conference earlier this week.

But forget all the polls,even the expanded information that you and I have access to online these days.

The only way to know what is going on are the party and candidate daily tracking polls. These are the ones that go on for a period of days or longer, with samples taken every single day. Only then do you get a sense of how the momentum is shifting.

Everything else is like comparing apples and oranges, though I do like the complilations that Real Clear Politics averages uses. We did something like that in the White House in 1988. But back then, we had to draw our projection maps with colored pencils.