House of Eratosthenes

It is oh so fashionable to remain pessimistic, and show optimism only in muted tones. But to show a surplus of optimism in favor of the iPresident, would be foolish I think.

For the first time since their 2006 election drubbing, top Republicans see signs — however faint — of a political resurgence over the next year.

At first blush, this sounds absurd. After all, polls show the GOP more unpopular than ever, and the John Ensign sex scandal serves as a vivid, real-time reminder of why many see the party as a collection of hypocrites.

But several trends suggest this optimism might not be as far-fetched as it seems.
:
How the Republicans Could Come Back

A red state

Polls show that Obama’s chief vulnerability is public concern over the soaring deficit. And as the sticker shock of a trillion-dollar-plus health care plan takes hold, these concerns are only likely to grow.

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) — long used to hearing complaints about Bush — says his moderate constituents have finally found something else to gripe about. “Now the dominant thing I hear from them is: ‘What is all this government spending?'” said Kirk, who is mulling a Senate run next year.
:
Promises, promises

Obama promised his stimulus plan would keep unemployment below 10 percent, and some of his advisers said it would remain below 8 percent. But now the president himself says it will hit 10 percent this year.

The administration’s technique of incorporating “jobs saved” into its accounting is being met with increased skepticism — and is unlikely to resonate if unemployment lines run long.

“I think his biggest vulnerability right now is that unemployment is going to exceed 10 percent and be there for some time,” said House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.). “The stimulus bill was meant to sustain and create new jobs. And it hasn’t done it.”

What’s coming up next is a “midterm” congressional election in 2010. Therefore, in my mind, it is meaningful to inspect what exactly is meant by the term “coming back.” You can’t honestly produce an answer to the question “Do Republicans have a chance?” without first performing this inspection.

First of all, there is the objective of roaring back into power with the full mandate Republicans had in 1994 after the electorate had what our news anchors told us was a “temper tantrum.”

Secondly, there is the decidedly different objective of stepping up to the podium of the loyal opposition, performing a simple day-to-day sanity check on The Holy Man’s expen$ive policies.

It is faulty thinking to conflate these two objectives into one, pronounce a lukewarm milquetoast verdict of “Eh, they got a shot but I wouldn’t count on it,” and walk away. You have to keep these separate. You HAVE to, because the first of those two options is a restoration of trust following a betrayal and those are never quick. It’s like the man-of-the-house moving back in after his wife has made the decision to take him back for the sake of the children. Even if it does happen, nobody’s going to be feeling entirely good about it. Especially if daddy was “taken back” after having sexual escapades with his secretary, moving in with her, doing some lines of coke, taking a European vacation with her and her parents, knocking her up, wallpapering her new nursery room, and sending the credit card bill for it all back home. Trust is violated in a heartbeat, and never fully restored even years later. Not really.

The second of those two — well good heavens. How on earth is it going to seem like a great idea to pass this up by the autumn of ’10? We’re still going to want to be a kinda-sorta-dictatorship in fifteen months because Obama is still so wonderful? Folks, it isn’t shaping up that way now. Of course all eyes are on President Obama; back when He was about to be inaugurated, all eyes were on Him back then too. But it’s different. Back then people were watching Him the way disciples want to watch the religious figure who leads them. Oh look at me, I actually touched His robe! I’ll never wash this hand again as long as I live!

Nowadays, people watch Him the way sailors watch a canon ball rolling around on the deck of their sloop. What the hell is He going to do next??

See, that’s a trust issue too. People are watching Him because He’s dangerous and they don’t know what He’s going to do. They don’t trust him. They’re starting to yearn for the checks-and-balances that are supposed to be in place right now, but aren’t really working.

It’s a funny thing about opposition congresses. People are never willing to admit, on a large scale, that they like this idea. But it is clearly what the Founding Fathers intended, and American history, even recent history, is chock full of occasions on which the electorate figured out this idea was necessary, and acted to put such a congress in place. Government marching in lockstep just oh-so-sure about what to do next — it seems like a great thing to the weak-minded. It isn’t so great when you’re living out your own real life under it. That’s when people wake up; that’s when they start to get it.

“Nowadays, people watch Him the way sailors watch a canon ball rolling around on the deck of their sloop. What the hell is He going to do next??”

Freakin’ cracked me up.
- tim | 06/26/2009 @ 12:26
I missed where you mentioned that the Republicans will start presenting candidates that are different from the Democrats presented.

I also missed where anybody explained why more people will leave home to vote for Moreof Thesame, or Notas Badsas.

Until good quality candidates are presented AND SUPPORTED, I’m not going to travel 24 miles to vote for either of the candidates mentioned above.

Certainly not if the taxes are expensive as today’s vote suggests they will be.
- Larry Sheldon | 06/26/2009 @ 19:55
I’ll give you a hint: She’s the youngest governor and she’s got a wonderful pair of pins. Can you see her signing off on a carbon sin tax of any kind? That old guy she was paired up with, maybe, but not her.

As an aside, did you remember to donate to her legal defense fund? You mention the issue of candidates being supported, and the attack that’s taken place on her is nothing more or less than a direct full-frontal assault on the First Amendment — its core pillar. Through the flagrant abuse of some ramshackle “ethics” process.

Speaking for myself, she’s exactly what I was wanting to see and I think what I’ve been wanting to see is pretty close to your own vision, Larry. I’ll boil the whole thing down to its essentials right here and right now: Stop fucking apologizing! At least, just for existing, you don’t owe an apology to anyone. Nobody owes an apology for being, save for those who demand apologies from others, just for being.

Hey. There’s a bumper sticker. And this vote today you mention aptly demonstrates the need for it…right here, and right now.
- mkfreeberg | 06/26/2009 @ 20:44
Yes, I donated–one of the first, I do believe. No, that’s not right. I was one of the first when the “webathon” effort started, and one of the persistent whiners that that effort was wasting energy.

But we need more that one candidate. We need VP’s Senators , Representatives, Governors, Assemblymen, Mayors, ….

She can’t do it all. Well she probably could, but the l;aw, you know…..

And these folks are NOT getting it done: http://race42008.com/
- Larry Sheldon | 06/26/2009 @ 21:01
Well, I got a kid outta wedlock. All that acid reflux directed Palin’s way just from her choosing to not kill a child. Imagine what they’d churn up with my name on the ballot — phew. More harm than good, that’s what I’d do.

Victory belongs to your race2008 folks anytime they want to claim it, you know. All they have to do is worry about trying to run a check on the power of democrats, as opposed to trying to elect Republicans. That whole “Which Party Has The Better People” thing is an exercise in futility, because what the democrats are selling there is “you can think of yourself as a wonderful person AND get dimwitted girls to spread their flabby thighs for you without a second thought!” That’s the message on the Daily Show side of the divide. Republicans are not ever going to match it and they need to stop trying.

The instant they get people thinking about “What policies work and what policies don’t?” — they win. All they have to do is get the dialogue started. It hasn’t started yet. And now, people really want it to.
- mkfreeberg | 06/26/2009 @ 21:17
Would this be a good time to say I hope we don’t elect any more “Republicans” like Mary Bono Mack, Mike Castle, Mark Kirk, Leonard Lance, Frank LoBiondo, John McHugh, Dave Reichert, and Chris Smith?

Mrs. Palin will not be allowed to take all their places.

WE DO NOT NEED ANY MORE RINO LOSERS!
- Larry Sheldon | 06/26/2009 @ 22:09

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

A GOP Comeback Possible?Friday, June 26th, 2009

A GOP Comeback Possible?
Friday, June 26th, 2009