Some Reality On 2006?
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Elections, General PoliticsThe New York Times talks about how the Dems opportunity isn’t as rosy as some may think.
Democrats clearly face hurdles that make it harder to translate national discontent into big changes in the House. “The map is not skewed for competitive races,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “On the other hand, you have voters who are sick and tired of the direction that the country is going. Which will outweigh? If anyone tells you a year out, they’ve never been in politics.”
And more evidence that “fiscally responsible” Democrats will soon emerge.
Of course, the public’s view of Mr. Bush and his party may change significantly over the next year. But right now, Congressional Democrats say they are preparing to run as the party of change, offering “new priorities,” as their talking points put it, with an emphasis on “putting our fiscal house in order” and making new investments in energy independence, health care and education.
Interesting times ahead, but I believe another Democratic majority may be many years off, possibly only coming to fruition in 2012.
Reasons? Well, I don’t think the Dems are going to recapture any majority in 2006. Their message (and performance_ is still too weak. So, come 2008, I think McCain will take the Presidency, but the Republicans will continue to lose seats given “Bush weariness”. Now, McCain will be a popular President, but it still won’t change the swing back towards a more liberal philosophy in this country as we see domestic issues trump the War on Terrorism. Given that, in 2012 Dems will take back the majority, and possibly the White House when Barack Obama carries a new Democratic message of centrism into the Oval Office.
I’ve shared this scenario with some of my Dem friends and they just shake their head and sigh. They say it’s too long and the country will be ruined by then. Hardly. We’re strong and a more balanced Congress will make things a lot more balanced. But the Dems need to find themselves again, find their voice and refocus to the realities of this electorate. The outcome will be a more fiscally minded Democratic party that will counteract wedge issues with the social realities of the day.
Farfetched? Give me your thoughts.
This entry was posted on Monday, November 14th, 2005 and is filed under Elections, General Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
November 14th, 2005 at 1:11 pm
I think McCain would be a longshot – not because of his politics but because of his age. In 2008 he’ll be 72, and because of that I doubt the Republicans would nominate him, no matter how popular he is. Don’t get me wrong, of all the potential Republican nominees he’s fairly close to the top for me, though I disagree with many of his positions. A balanced budget is high on the list for me, I just wish it weren’t always tied to tax cuts for the rich.
With the fundies pretty much still in charge of the Republican Party I expect them to push the nomination of some nutcase like Frist (though he’s damaged goods now), so if the Dems manage to field a respectable candidate they should be able to pull it off. With fewer swing states capable of throwing gay marriage on the ballot the fundies won’t be herded to the polls like they were in 2004, so the Dem/moderate vote should prevail.
From what I’ve read the likelihood of a Senatorial powershift is small, due to the specific seats up for grabs in 2006, though I do think the Dems will pick up a couple spots. It’s really too soon to judge the potential political climate in 2008, so though I hope a shift will occur, I can’t assume it as a fait accompli.
The Congressional races though are I think an interesting possibility. Anti-Republican and Anti-incumbent sentiment is running high, so if those feelings stay hot for another year, I expect a major shift in the House in 2006, despite the gerrymandered districts.
I do think Barack is an interesting Presidential hopeful, but I also think he’s too young yet until at the very earliest 2012, and probably 2016.
Another possibility I heard about and at first discounted as nuts was to try to get Oprah to run for president. After thinking about it I realized, here’s a candidate that a huge percentage of Americans from both parties trust (when trust in politicians is at an all-time low), who is most likely incorruptible due to her enormous wealth, who is intelligent and capable (proven by her incredible successes despite low beginnings), and who is outside the political establishment. In addition, she is likely to be the “people’s candidate”, favoring programs to get people off the streets and into jobs rather than the old “tax cuts for corporations & the rich” that has become the Repub’s ONLY plan.
The only problem is she doesn’t want to do it. I’ve always thought the best person for the job of politician was the intelligent, capable, compassionate, and responsible person who does not want the job. There’s a whole “recruit Oprah” movement going on…if you think this idea makes sense, please send her a personal email asking her to reconsider.