Suddenly, Democrats see a possibility in 2006 they have long dreamed of: a sweeping midterm election framed around what they describe as the simple choice of change with the Democrats or more of an unpopular status quo with the Republican majority.
Well, great. Be even better if we actually had some change to offer.
In the meantime, the different strategies of the parties are apparent. "These guys represent the status quo, and we are change," said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. His Republican counterpart, Representative Thomas M. Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, argued in a recent memorandum that, "in the end, Congressional elections have less to do with current events, opinions and polls, than they do with the fundamentals," which he defined as "money, message and members."
"We are change." Sigh. Shut up, Emanuel.
Elsewhere, the Republican PunditGuy has an interesting response to the same story. He agrees; Republicans do have cause for concern. But not because they're being increasingly revealed to be crooks and incompetents more concerned with covering their own asses than those they were elected to serve. No, because if enough people just think they are, that's the ball game.
Even if the Iraq, Katrina, Rita, and Harriet combination isn't the perfect storm Democrats are praying for, it is only the perception that matters. If a majority of Americans believe those forces, along with the problems encircling DeLay, Rove, and Frist are enough to topple the GOP, we'll experience an '06 cycle like the Democrats experienced the '94 cycle.
He overlooks the Terri Schiavo case when listing the problems that have made a majority of Americans turn against the republicans. I continue to think that you can hardly overestimate its importance. It was the moment the majority finally began to realize the full extent of Bush's arrogance, and raised concerns about his "moral agenda" that I don't think have been forgotten. But he continues:
We can't afford to let the Democrats take advantage of the current environment. For if they do, they'll command the attention, they'll control the dialog, and they'll convince the public that Republicans need to go.
And that's not reality.
Well, I wouldn't worry about the Democrats taking advantage of the current enviroment too hard. The Democrats couldn't take advantage of a dunken, gorgeous nympomaniac on her 18th birthday.
No, if I were PunditGuy, I'd be cautioning my party that they can't afford to keep creating the current enviroment. But that's just me. From where I'm sitting, if Democrats do make any gains in 2006, it's not going to be because they offered such a shining vision of hope.
It's going to be because the other guys spent a year showing why their election was even more unthinkable. In other words, this is not going to be '94 all over again. It's going to be Bush 1 vs. Dukakis all over again. Only this time, the republicans are in the tank.
No comments:
Post a Comment