Rasmussen's latest poll shows Ds and Rs even in the generic Congressional ballot (for the uninitiated, the pollster asks the citizen whether the citizen would vote for a Democrat or a Republican for Congress, without naming the candidate).
This is, of course, awful news for Ds, who have not been able to translate their considerable wins in 2006 and 2008 into a base of popular support. Independents, not Democrats, are the political grouping that's growing.
That doesn't mean that Republicans are not on the rise, however. The Republican brand remains deeply stained, but individual candidates are thriving. In the few elections of stature this year, Rs are doing nicely: NJ's Democratic governor Corzine is way behind the GOP challenger, Republican Crist looks strong in the Senate race in Florida. In Virginia, Clinton apparatchik Terry McAuliffe lost the primary, the winner of which now faces a Republican to whom he has previously lost in a statewide race.
The reason for this is, of course, transparent to everyone who is not a Democrat: no one is pleased that the Democrats are using their present, unchecked political power to spend the Republic into penury. The Ds risk sullying their "brand" in a matter of months, something that took the Rs at least eight years of excessive government spending to accomplish.
A generation ago, Americans turned to the eminently upright Jimmy Carter to correct the era of corruption of 1970s politics. But within months, the electorate experienced buyers regret as they realized what the stubbornly sanctimonious Carter would do when given the power to govern. More recently, the body politic asked the eminently charming and diplomatic Barack Obama to restore grace and understanding after the distasteful aggression of the Bush years. Now that they've tasted what it means to be governed by someone used to giving everyone what they want, they experience a parallel regret.
7 comments:
One of Carter's problems was that he and the congress, even though run by his own party, were often at odds. I don't know if this will be the case with Obama or not. There are signs that all is not unity and happiness, but it's still too early to tell.
I would love to see more gridlock because that would put a break on all this spending.
But of course, my family is now "on the dole" because Obama couldn't save my husband's job. (not that he would have wanted to)
Doc the point of view on your blog is simply amazing. You and I really do live in Bizarro Worlds. Yet you still remain my idol...a paradox akin to being a sinner and saved at the same time....
With time you will appreciate the wisdom, PS/SWNID. Until then, you simply haven't lived long enough. In the meantime, welcome to the 1970s. For us, it's welcome back.
SWIND,
Does this return to the 70s mean that we will all be wearing striped bell-bottoms and driving Pinto hatchbacks?
Ah, Christine, we believe you are painfully close to the truth! The fashion industry has been mining late 60s and early 70s nostalgia, as far as we, a devoted non-observer of fashion, can tell. And in the unhoped for event of the administration imposing all of its various mandates on automobiles, we will all be driving fiberglass cans that almost measure up to the Pinto's and Vega's road-worthiness.
In this regard it appears that the designers are in tacit collusion with the administration. Next up: a disco revival.
It did occur to me that that Obama wants us to drive those 70's failures again. Although I have to admit, my first car was a 76 Corolla and it was a great car because you couldn't kill it. It seemed to thrive on neglect. I doubt anything to government expects us to drive now, will last half as long.
Welcome back Cotter?
Post a Comment