I have to admit to experiencing a case of extreme mandible depression after reading Hugh Hewitt this morning. Despite generic poll numbers that show people would prefer Darth Vader over a Republican when voting for a Congressional candidate, Hugh prefers to walk on the sunny side of the street, in effect saying “Aha! We’ve got those Democrats exactly where we want them!”
But with the rejection of the immigration approach favored by the Democrats and the mavericks, the appearance of some fiscal discipline among some senators, the slow but certain march towards the confirmation of future Judges Kavanaugh, Boyle, Haynes etc, the word that the White House will be back in the judicial nominations business very soon, and—most of all—the return of the war to the public’s consciousness because of Iran’s manifest aggressiveness on nukes and Israel and undeniable threats in Central and South America, suddenly the election if framed—again—- as a choice between the serious though flawed party of victory, growth, and border security and the party of surrender, to both the jihadists abroad and the demands for amnesty now and again in the future at home.There are undeniable signs of GOP renewal, in Senate races in Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, Washington State, Montana and Missouri—and perhaps next week in Florida—as well as great candidates for governor in Blackwell in Ohio and Swann in Pennsyvlania.
I really wish I could share Mr. Hewitt’s usually infectious enthusiasm for Republican chances in November. I also wish I could fly but given my weight, lack of wings, and a scarcity of magic fairy dust, it looks like both wishes will, by necessity, be relegated to the realm of fantasy rather than coming true any time soon.
The facts are grim and getting grimmer. Leaving aside the President’s poll numbers (which should be largely irrelevant in an off year election held during an incumbent President’s second term), the shockingly low support for Republicans in Congress – only 25% think they are doing a “good job – along with dismal numbers for Republicans on the so-called “generic” ballot where the latest AP-Ipsos poll has Democrats outpolling the GOP by an almost historic 51%-34%, both point to extraordinary unease with Republicans running the House and the Senate.
This may not turn into the kind of disaster for Republicans the Democrats are hoping for. Then again, if the economy takes a turn for the worse or if there is another big scandal, or if gas prices top $4 a gallon, or if things start to go south in Iraq, the worry and disgust many voters are feeling at this point could result in a Democratic tidal wave that would swamp the GOP on election day.
Not a repeat of 1994 as the Dems are hoping for. The model would be 1974 where Watergate and disgust over the Viet Nam war gave the Democrats 54 more seats in the House.
The deadly combination of conservative Republicans staying home and an energized Democratic base may put in play more than the 30 or so seats most analysts are saying are at risk for Republicans. The definition of what constitutes a “competitive” house race is generally accepted as the incumbent receiving 55% or less of the vote in the previous comparable election cycle. But Democratic pollster Charlie Cook has pointed out if that “safe” number is raised to just 57%, it puts 20 more Republican seats at risk.
On the other hand, Mr. Hewitt has an answer to that scenario:
As Michael Barone has argued, the GOP voters just seem to keep turning out, despite their grumbling.Bill Kristol has argued that 9/11 may have changed American politics far more than we know, and I suspect the president’s poll numbers—to the extent they are accurate—reflect not dismay with the war, but dismay with the Administration’s occasional appearance of placing priority on other than the war. Telling the American people that there is no substitute for victory in Iraq and firmness with Iran even to the point of confrontation is exactly the reassurance that serious people need. The president has been doing this for months, but he and his Administration have been helped in recent weeks by the appearance of the left’s venom and its effects on the Democratic leadership. The party is truly unhinged, and a vote for any Democrat will be a vote for defeat, and not just in Iraq.
Suddenly, the debate is back where it ought to be, on the war, judges, taxes, spending and also border security.
I don’t necessarily want to question either Mr. Barone’s or Mr. Kristol’s judgement, but frankly, I believe that both gentlemen are sipping from the same glass of kool aid. Turnout modeling is an inexact science (just ask the Democrats from 2004). This is especially true in “competitive” races where turnout can be affected by a wide variety of factors including local ballot issues, candidate personalities, and the local economy.
As for how our politics have changed since 9/11, I wrote this for the American Thinker back in June:
At bottom, the brouhaha about prisoner abuse, Koran flushing, puppet governments, Bush- lied-and-people-died-no-blood-for-oil-U.S.out-of-Iraq battle cries reveals a desperate desire on the part of many Americans – perhaps a majority – to wish away the harsh realities that the war in Iraq is exposing, and the monumental effort it will take to win this conflict and defeat the forces of ignorance, intolerance, and terror.President Warren G. Harding used the phrase “return to normalcy†to describe a state of mind that existed in the United States prior to our entry in World War I. There was a reaction to America sullying her hands by taking part in what, at the time, was seen as part of the endless cycle of European self-immolative conflagrations that had flared up every hundred years or so. Harding thought it was high time America returned to a pre-war state of mind where, as his successor Calvin Coolidge so aptly put it, “the chief business of the American people is business,†and the only foreign entanglement worthy of our interest was trying to keep Latin America peaceful and beyond the clutches of European powers. Harding and Coolidge succeeded in making America forget its involvement in that war.
Republicans underestimate this yearning at their own peril. As I have stated on numerous occasions, the biggest mistake this President has made to date has been his failure to call on the American people for shared sacrifice in the prosecution of the war. As it stands today, the burden for fighting this war remains on the men and women in uniform who perform spectacularly day after day and on their families. Why should it surprise us that the American people would want to forget about a war in which they have no personal stake, no feeling of solidarity with each other and the brave men and women who are taking the struggle directly to our enemies?
The Democrats will seek to delegitimize the war if they do in fact, take control of the Congress in November:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said in an interview last week that a Democratic House would launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House’s first-term energy task force and probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Pelosi denied Republican allegations that a Democratic House would move quickly to impeach President Bush. But, she said of the planned investigations, “You never know where it leads to.”[...]
Pelosi also vowed “to use the power to investigate” the administration on multiple fronts, starting with the task force convened in secret by Vice President Cheney to devise the administration’s energy policy. The administration has successfully fought lawsuits since 2001 that sought to reveal the names of energy company executives tapped to advise the task force.
“Certainly the conduct of the war” in Iraq would be the subject of hearings, if not a full-fledged House investigation, Pelosi said. Another subject for investigation could be the use of intelligence on Saddam Hussein’s alleged weapons of mass destruction to make the case for the 2003 invasion.
Hoyer added that he would like to see investigations into the extent of domestic wiretapping by the National Security Agency, and the billions of dollars wasted by contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This shouldn’t be surprising either. After all, since most Democrats do not believe we are at war in the first place, (seeing the issue of national security a political weakness) they wish to make it virtually impossible for any future President to use force except as a response to an attack – say a nuke detonated in New York City. What good any kind of response would be at that point, the Democrats refuse to say.
Also, by returning to “the good old days” where we didn’t have to worry about silly things like terrorists in the United States plotting with their leaders overseas to kill mass numbers of us, the Democrats will feel perfectly comfortable in tooling back homeland security programs like the NSA intercept program, increased border security, and other measures implemented by the Bush Administration that they have labeled “excessive” or even “dictatorial.”
They will run on a platform that basically says 9/11 never happened. Or even if they acknowledge it, their only reason for doing so will be to criticize Republican efforts in response as “overreacting” to what happened that horrible day.
In this respect, I think Mr. Hewitt is tragically mistaken when he says that the American people are uneasy because the Administration has downplayed both the War on Terror as well as the threat from Iran. Despite 9/11, we are still an extraordinarily insular people and if these last few years prove anything, it is that Osama Bin Laden’s belief that we don’t have the staying power for a long war may prove prophetic if the Democrats ever achieve majority status.
Will a push by the Bush Administration to nationalize the election by making the war and terrorist threats the overriding issues save Republicans in November as Hugh seems to think it will? I would say to my friend be careful what you wish for. By nationalizing the election, other factors would come into focus that would play to the advantage of the Democrats including people’s feelings about this President which at the moment are as low as one can go without an impeachment trial. Even if conservatives come back to the fold, the fact that Democrats outpoll Republicans 3-1 among people who identify themselves as independents makes nationalizing any issues in this off year election extremely hazardous for Republicans.
I will be the first person to congratulate Hugh if his analysis proves prescient. But as it stands now, I have to wonder if Mr. Hewitt is letting his enthusiasm get the better of him when looking at what many other analysts see as sinking Republican chances in November.
9:58 am
As a former liberal whose own former party headed far left, it would be helpful for Democrats to recognize that they are no longer the party of liberalism but are actually the party of collectivist Marxism.
10:55 am
You’re certainly right that Hugh Hewitt is the ying to John Derbyshire’s yang. Hugh is wrong to buck the convential wisdom of the blogosphere; right now Republican control of Congress is in dire straits thanks largely to a few key issues where they have abandoned the principles that got them elected:
– Immigration—- This one passed the ‘Mom Test’* the other day. – Spending / the Defecit – Terrorism—- Ahmadinejad has everyone who follows the news just a tad bit jumpy. – Perception of Corruption
Other issues include: judicial confirmation, education reform, medical cost control, social security, energy fluxuations, and others that escape me at the moment. Then there’s the war in Iraq that has not, I think we can say at the very least, has not turned out as expected. While the media spun these issues, they spun it as they did because the Republicans in Congress accomplished so little this term. They spin ‘No Child Left Behind’ (I know, not passed by this Congress, but bear with me) as a black hole sucking in whatever cash enters its gravitational pull; it was not spun as a heartless, cut-throat attempt to break the teacher’s unions (as true education reform would entail) while leaving poor, minority students to rot in sub-standard schools (as true education reform would NOT entail).
The problem for the Republicans in Congress is with themselves, not the media. They abandoned their roots to join the elite political class, and for that they will pay. No amount of political campaigning in the next six months will hide it from the electorate.
Now when Michael Barone says that Republican voters just keep on coming out for Republican canidates, he’s missing the point. The Republicans in Congress have not acted like Republicans this term. Why then should Republican voters support them? This election is, I believe, going to turn out like the Illinois Senate Race in 2004 where Alan Keyes was soundly defeated by Baruch Obama. It will only be on a national level, unless barring some miraculous ‘Deux ex Machina’ saves their hides. That Spengler is predicting one (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HD11Ak03.html) will not make me sleep any better.
*The Mom Test: Something becomes some rises to the attention of one’s mother who is usually totally oblivious to these sorts of things, first used, I believe by Bill Simmons.
11:03 am
I agree with a fair amount of this Rick. Nationalizing the election would be the worst possible strategy for the Republicans because the field is dramatically tilted against them on the national level. Their only hope for minimizing damage comes from exploiting the strange phenomenon of voters having strongly negative feelings about Congress, yet pretty strongly positive feelings about their own representative. In other words, keep it local, stupid.
One of the real problems for the GOP comes from the fact that the traditional manner in which individual representatives keep their campaigns localized, and distance themselves from the national scene, is to sell themselves as adept at bringing home the bacon. Yet spending, especially earmarking, is a rhetorical target for a significant part of the base. Look for some very real tensions within the GOP caucus over spending issues, breaking down along a line demarcating those with safe seats and those who are in a fight.
12:04 pm
Hewitt’s posts on the subject have a strong Harriet Meiers vibe.
1:13 pm
Rick Said: “Republicans underestimate this yearning at their own peril. As I have stated on numerous occasions, the biggest mistake this President has made to date has been his failure to call on the American people for shared sacrifice in the prosecution of the war.”
Agree Rick, this was a big mistake but I would put it at #3.
#1 Stubborn, unreachable, beyond discussion, support for open borders, illegal immigration, amnesty, and free citizenship. Putting one race and national origin above another, putting criminals ahead of legal immigrants and citizens, and fighting a phony war on terror by leaving our borders open to any terrorist with feet.
#2 The President and senior GOP leadership going out of its way to ignore and hurt the conservative base. Example: White House support for McCain, the Democrat’s darling.
#3 What you said, not engaging the public in our defense.
Nice post, thanks again.
2:43 pm
I hate to say this but Hugh has a book to sell, and it ain’t called “Paint the Town Blue.” We are not doing well, and I hope there is a kernel of truth to what Hugh has to say, but you can’t expect Bill Gates to talk down the software industry.
5:24 pm
Rick:
And just who has decided to lambast Bush and the Republicans for huge failings that are really mites compared to the Life and Death struggle for the world (secret – look in the mirror and bring your righteously indignant right wing bloggerswith you). The choice in November is simple Democrats – Death, Republicans – Life.
I for one will continue to stand with the president and my cousins the Danes (the only Europeans not on their knees).
Where do you stand.
China
6:09 pm
Several people tell me they won’t even go out to vote against Hillary. That is deep, deep disaffection with the BushGOP.
Hugh is a fine fellow, but I would bet with him this time. This election is the Dem’s to lose and lose it they could. But the BushGOP is not going to win any elections now. They will only get there by Democratic Party outrages. Maybe Patrick Kennedy and his father can stir up enough one of those outrages, but I doubt the mainstream media will hammer that enought to make a difference.
8:03 pm
Polls can reflect whatever the pollster wants the result to be. The only poll that ever has any validity is the one called an election.
12:15 am
Nervous Nellies, the lot o’ya. Democrats will not take over either house, if you want confirmation of that, replay Pelosi’s interview on MTP on your Tivo. Futhermore, we have a great economy, roaring along, low base inflations, home sales, consumer confidence, jobs. The BEST strategy for the GOP is to NATONALIZE the election. Here’s the pitch, “So You Want to Hand Over this Economy to THEM??”
12:50 am
How to Lose an Election
We have seen the Republicans do their best to lose the 2006 mid-term elections with pork barrel spending, ignoring their base on immigration enforcement, an inability to communicate effectively on the war. Polls show that a ...
7:35 am
I wouldn’t give too much credence to polls:
http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3546
9:18 am
No offense, Rick, but that is a cheap shot.
The issue of Bush’s pre-emptive war was extremely dangerous and a change of policy for the U.S. which had brought a lot of hazards with it. The fact that nothing was uncovered in Iraq which proved to be of any danger to us destroyed our credibility. More than once I said this was going to be a problem if and when we dealt with a country who truly WAS a hazard (Iran). That president is a lunatic with the financial resources to bankroll a nuclear program. But look where we are now. We start screaming war and we look like the boy who cried wolf. On top of which the insinuation that it was done just to get at Saddams’ oil is ringing loud and clear in Europe and the Middle East.
As things stand now, we really DO have to be careful how we use force now. The soldiers are getting tired, and right now there is no end in sight, so what soldiers will we use to conduct this war? We will need to ultimately replace a lot of military equipment that will be used up by the time the Iraq campaign ends> This is an extremely expensive financial situations that will only feed an already obscene deficit. Then there is the issue that, in the world’s eye, we are now no longer trusted like we once were. Bush didn’t just spend is own political capital with this war, he spent ours.
I am sorry but right now, we are starting to tread water as a country and a person would have to be blind not to see it.
11:36 am
I was writing about most liberals talking about the “War on Terror” – that by putting it in quote marks, they think they can somehow wish it away.
People can disagree about the efficacy of pre emptive war. But to belittle or even fail to acknowledge that we are at war with Islamism, the left not only deligitimzes the war but shunts 9/11 to the background as if that date didn’t happen.
2:32 pm
[...] Right Wing Nuthouse states ..the biggest mistake this President has made to date has been his failure to call on the American people for shared sacrifice in the prosecution of the war.. [...]
6:07 pm
Far more than Watergate, the factors that gave the Democrats 54 seats in 1974 were double digit inflation, gas prices, and gas lines. Vietnam was a non-issue.
Today we have a war, but aside from gas prices inflation is not high and no one is waiting in line to pay for gas. If the pump price drops below $2.50 by November the GOP is fairly secure.
9:55 pm
The Midterm Elections: Is The ‘Conventional Wisdom’ Wise?
A couple of articles today got me thinking about the forthcoming midterm elections. You know, the ones where Republicans are going to be turned out from DC in droves and the newly Democratic House and Senate will be investigatin’ and
9:52 am
I’m going with Kool Aid drinker. Hugh’s got a great show, but he views politics through rose-colored (which I guess does mean red) glasses. It’s not just this post, which is indeed ludicrous—seriously, competitive in Florida? without a candidate change? seriously!—but a whole line of pronouncements, especially including his absurd complacency in the face of Harriet Miers’ nomination. Hugh can be a very sharp thinker, but his partisanship unfortunately gets in the way of him always being so.