Bad News for the 2010 Victors
Posted: Wednesday, April 07, 2010
by Terry Mitchell
http://commenterry.blogs.com
Whichever political party comes out victorious in this fall's midterm elections may ultimately wish that things had turned out the other way around. Let's look at two of the most likely outcomes.
Suppose the Democrats are able to use their momentum from the healthcare reform legislation and any other bills they may pass later this year to either make gains or at least maintain a majority in both houses of Congress. That means the Democrats would be in complete control of Washington for the next two years. Chances are, that by the fall of 2012, the American public will have grown weary of four years of total Democratic rule and will be looking for a change. This desire for change would not only put Democratic legislators in danger of losing their seats, but it would also make it less likely that President Obama would be re-elected.
The only difference between that situation and U.S. politics is that we just cycle back and forth between the Democrats and Republicans, getting tired of one party's rule after so long, and then inviting the other one back. Another Democratic victory in 2010 (after they topped the GOP in 2006 and 2008) would almost guarantee that they wouldn't be invited back to power in 2012.
Now let's say the Republicans use the public outrage over the healthcare bill to fuel a change at the polls in November. Let's assume that it is enough to allow the GOP to re-take both the House and the Senate. This would, in effect, make Obama a lame duck present for the remainder of his first term. That would mean Obama's presidency be all but over, right? Well, not really.
Remember the 1994 Republican revolution and their successful selling of their Contract with America? When they rolled to power in Congress that year, many people believed it was going to doom poor Bill Clinton's presidency. But, alas, Clinton won in a near landslide in 1996. What happened?
While some people mistakenly blame the weakness of his opponent, Bob Dole, Clinton's victory was mainly due to the fact that Republicans in Congress allowed their new-found power to get the best of them. Instead of working with Clinton to get bipartisan, common-sense legislation passed, they focused too much on Clinton's personal peccadilloes, ultimately becoming more obstructionist than anything else. During his 1996 re-election campaign, Clinton succeeded in using that against them. Not only did he win, the Democrats regained many of the congressional seats they lost in 1994.
Therefore, whichever party comes out on top in 2010 should enjoy it while they can. It'll likely be short-lived, as 2012 will probably be a much different story.
This Article has been viewed 793 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (1 total)Darn - just when I had hope that people would finally be sick and tired of being sick and tired and vote the professionals out and get somepeople like us voted in!Unfortunately, Marijo, I don't see the non-professionals taking over anytime soon. People seem content to just rotate between the Democrats and Republicans. Maybe one day the voters in this country will finally wise up and elect leaders who are truly independent.And not those who have such a personal bank roll that they cannot relate to most of the population.Yes, Marijo, it would be great to have elected officials who could relate to us real folks. :-)
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.