The Meaning of 11/07/06

I already posted on my immediate, visceral reaction to the results of Tuesday's election. Now, I'm going to talk a little bit about what comes next, and what reaction should be had to the results.

First, I'm not going to overanalyze what happened on Tuesday. It was a solid butt-kicking by the Democratic party over the Republicans, and it was driven by disgust and anger, which were triggered by repeated scandals, incompetent management and leadership, and the continuing bad news out of Iraq. It didn't help matters, I suspect, that Iran and North Korea don't seem to be that concerned about the United States - and at least outwardly are both moving full-steam-ahead towards full-fledged nuclear power status.

Now, I'm curious about exactly what Republican power-brokers really thought heading into this election. Karl Rove had been telling everyone that Republicans were going to keep control of both houses, that he knew what the numbers really meant, blah blah blah. If Rove really believed this, then he's a hack pure and simple. This analysis is not my own, but I fully endorse it: Rove is and always has been over-rated. He essentially got lucky, winning an election for President Bush by 537 votes in 2000 (and losing the popular vote in the process) and pulling off narrow wins in 2002 and 2004 (although the presidential vote was fairly decisive). The problem with crediting Rove for these wins is that we don't know what would have happened absent Rove - in other words, a different "architect" might have been able to get Bush more votes (and an outright win) in 2000 by moving to the middle rather than to the base. We just don't know. Enough about Rove - he's been proven to be either delusional or ineffective, and there isn't a lot more to say about him. I'm guessing Republican presidential candidates won't be lining up to hire him for 2008.

Strategy
So, about that "run to the base" strategy - it doesn't work. Or, at least, it won't work for long. The Republicans have painted themselves into a very uncomfortable corner - a corner that will continue to shrink year after year as Republicans are pushed into the South. If you look at the Senate breakdown right now, it doesn't look that bad - Republicans have a big majority in the Southeast, and have good margins in the Mountain West and the Plains states. However, running to the base has lost them support in the Mountain West (look at Montana, which now has 2 Democratic Senators), and has eroded support for "new Republican" ideas elsewhere. My sense is that the "moderate middle" is growing - at least outside of the South, and maybe there - and so Republicans will find that the base is disappearing. Every year will bring fewer voters, and barring a change in strategy this is awfully problematic. Not to mention that the "base" isn't exactly pleased with the Republicans right now anyway, what with the runaway spending and what appears to be a willingness to talk about so-called "moral" issues without doing anything about them. This Rove-ian strategy is a loser, and the Republicans need to ditch it, fast.

The Next Two Years
The conventional wisdom is that the president and Congress will fight continuously over the next 2 years. I don't think that has to happen. Democrats should take advantage of a weakened president and push hard to get some legislation passed - if I were them, I would move to get a minimum wage increase and a guest worker program, along with some other reforms they favor. Tied together with the right concessions, the president will go along with these reforms, and it will make the Democrats look like they can govern. They will also avoid the temptation to get too aggressive in terms of oversight - it would make them look like the Republicans did circa 1998-2000, when the party overreached in fighting Bill Clinton. They don't want that to happen. That said, contention is the most likely result over the next few years - but it doesn't have to be that way, and it shouldn't be that way.

Leadership in Congress
Who's going to end up as leaders in the House and Senate? It seems that the Democrats won by a big enough margin to put to rest any worry about Nancy Pelosi not becoming Speaker of the House - I don't see any way that she doesn't win the post. But who becomes Majority leader? I think the race between Steny Hoyer and John Murtha will be telling about how effectively Pelosi will be able to control her caucus - Murtha is an unabashed supporter, while Hoyer has been a thorn in her side as Minority Whip. If the caucus supports Murtha, I think it will indicate that they are fully behind Pelosi; if they go for Hoyer, it means they want a bit of control over her. We'll find out on November 16, when the Dems will hold their leadership election.

The next day, we'll find out whether the Republicans really want change. Speaker Dennis Hastert is returning to the back-benches, so current Majority Leader John Boehner is positioned to take over as Minority Leader. However, Boehner was tainted by the Foley scandal just like Hastert, and he's going to be challenged by Mike Pence and Joe Barton, both of whom seem to want to bring the party back to its roots. Boehner may be a goner, having lasted as leader for just a year. Roy Blunt, the Majority Whip, may retain his leadership position by becoming Minority Whip - but he too may be challenged.

In the Senate, there is no surprise on the Democratic side - Harry Reid will be the Majority Leader, and Dick Durbin the Majority Whip. As for the Republicans? Mitch McConnell is almost certain to become Minority Leader, but the post of Minority Whip is open and up for grabs. All indications are that Trent Lott wants that job and has been campaigning for it - but will he be hurt by the pseudo-scandal that knocked him out of his leadership position a few years back? He seems to think that he's cleansed himself, and he may be right - the Whip position is not as high profile as Leader.

2008

In 2008, Republicans will have 21 seats up for re-election while the Democrats have just 12. Of those, seats in Oregon, Minnesota, Colorado, and New Hampshire have to be considered very vulnerable. Kansas is moving noticeably towards the Dems, and may be in play. Freshmen will be running for re-election in Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Georgia, and Minnesota. In other words, it's not a particularly good situation for the Republicans. But all is going to depend on how the Democrats do in their trial run over the next 2 years.

As for the Presidential race that has already kicked off, I'm not going to go too in-depth yet. I'll be talking about this in detail later. Suffice it to say, I think John McCain is the likely Republican candidate, and I think Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, or Barack Obama is the likely Democratic candidate. It will be a very, very interesting primary season.

So there it is - I have more to say, but I've rambled on for long enough in this post. More will be coming over the next few days and weeks, and remember to watch late next week when the parties pick their leaders in the House.