Posted by
Patrick Henry on Wednesday, August 11, 2010 12:53:59 PM
Some have said that the coming election is significant because it will be a referendum
on Barack Obama's creeping eurosocialist "fundamental transformation" of America. If
that is true, and if the polling data holds up, then November 3, 2010, may well go down
as one of the most significant dates in American history.
If the pollsters are correct, and when they are so united in their renderings they seldom
miss the mark by much, Republicans, infused with Tea Party enthusiasm and a mission
for fiscal conservatism will make enormous gains toward restoring legislative balance to
the nation. Some say they will even capture a majority of seats in the House. But so what?
How will (or may) we poor schmucks who voted be better off on November 3 than we
are right now?
It all depends. There are cynics who see the Republicans as only a slightly more
conservative version of Democrats, and Tea Partiers as overly enthused cheerleaders who
don't really understand the Washington grist mill, let alone have the know-how to change
it. So, in their view, we won't be much better off at all. Just same old, same old, with a
bunch of new, jaundiced faces. That is one possible scenario, but probably an unlikely
one because those who survive the rigors of this campaign season will almost surely
come away from the experience with a vivid sense of the profound national discontent
over the current direction of things. They will quite likely understand that they have a
very limited space in time to bring about a radical reversal of course, lest they, too, go
the way of the incumbents they have ousted.
So, how might things look on November 3? If conservatives make deep inroads into
the liberal majority, but seize control of neither house, it will mark a new phase in the
all-out war for American hearts and minds. Desperation will drive Democrats to try
driving through pieces of the radical Obama agenda like cap-and-trade and union card
check in lame duck sessions before incoming conservatives can be sworn and seated.
Whether they succeed or not, such action will fuel such a national backlash as to
concede the moral high ground to their opponents, who will use it against them from
that time forward. Once seated, the new conservative cadre will frustrate every liberal
Obama initiative, forcing concession and compromise on every hand. It may result in
more gridlock, and that may be better than the current out-of-control slide toward
fiscal oblivion. But it is the least desirable of the possible scenarios.
Should conservatives capture the House, but not the Senate, they can force even
more compromises, and perhaps even begin to reverse some of the entitlement and
national security damage that Obama and his majority have wrought. It is true that
such will be hard without Senate cooperation, but remember that the Senate needs
House cooperation too, just to keep government going, and so will have to make
some concessions, however bitter. As the court battle heats up and it becomes clear
that the individual mandate of the healthcare reform bill is a constitutional overreach,
they may even have to concede to repeal and re-start. (Without the individual
mandate, the insurance exchanges and high-risk pools will collapse, nullifying all
the supposed benefits of the reform). Majorities do make a difference.
In their efforts to stay in power and turn back the tsunami of public disapproval,
Democrats are making a series of strategic and tactical miscalculations that are
likely to backfire on election day. They cannot run on their record, for it is their
record that has met with the public's disdain. Nor can they run on the popularity
of their president of whose performance a solid majority of Americans now
disapprove. So they have chosen among the unenviable lot of remaining options,
and they have chosen badly. They are viciously attacking Republicans and the
Te aParty, hurling accusations of racism, fascism and extremism. Historically, the
negative campaigning has persuaded many, but this time it's not going to work. In
this case the devil voters know (the Democrats) is perceived as infinitely worse
than those they aren't sure are even devils. The old politics-as-usual game has
grown tired, and is unlikely to preserve Democrats power this time. They have
raised the grim spectre of George W. Bush, whose very name stirs ill feelings in
many, supposing that if they can tar current Republicans with the Bush image,
they will win by default. The problem is that the current crop of fresh Republican
faces had nothing to do with George W. Bush, and has no stake in defending his
policies. It is therefore a stretch to drag in Bush, especially in an environment
where most believe that in nearly two years of Obama's presidency things have
gotten worse, not better.
Obama argues that Republicans don't have a single, solitary new idea to advance
the nation past the recession. In addition to being demonstrably false, it misses the
point that it is not just Republican ideas the electorate is seeking, but a reversal of
Obama's ideas. Finally, Democrats argue that Republicans and Tea Partiers have
ideas that are too extreme. So "no ideas" or ideas that are "too extreme?" Which is
it? The fact is that conservatives have no ideas that will advance the liberal agenda,
and most Americans are smart enough to see through the Obama-Democrat
subterfuge and get that. Democrats can't run on the positives of what they have
produced while in unprecedented power, so all they can do is raise alarm about
what George W. Bush did and what current Republicans might do. It may persuade
a few dimwits, but it won't win in November.
But there is a fire burning in America today which may, in the end, burn down
the ivory towers of both Democrats and Republicans. Increasingly, the old Democrat
versus Republican narrative is becoming irrelevant. What matters most to the voters
of today is responsibility versus irresponsibility. What matters is the perceived
encroachment of government upon private business and individual lives. What matters
is the ascendancy of the "political class" that pays no heed to what voters want, or
what they think, but takes its direction from liberal academia, or special interests like
the labor unions. It's post-political because it has infected not only the Tea Party, but
also Republicans, Independents who have no prior political allegiance and even some
commonsense Democrats. The days of career politicians and national transformation
by executive order are numbered. It all begins, for better or for worse, when the
votes of November 2 have been counted. Wouldn't it be nice, on the morning of the 3rd,
to wake up and feel that your vote had made a real difference?