Post-Election Analysis

Go down

20101106

Post 

Post-Election Analysis




So now that almost every election has been called save for about a half-dozen House races and Minnesota Governor, I feel like basically giving my thoughts on the outcome. While many pundits gave their predictions of how the election would turn out, I do not feel it is right to give general beliefs on how the American voter will vote until after they have made their choice (although I do profess that I believe I had a reasonably accurate view a month leading up to the election).

So first point: This election was a referendum on the policies of the current administration and congress. This should not come as a shock to anyone, because every election is a referendum on the current administration. That is why we have elections. That being said, this election was as bad as it was for Democrats because Americans did not like the policies. You can fairly and accurately argue that if the Democrats had used better communication methods to talk about their legislation that they would not have sustained such losses, but one must also remember that much of the major legislation was equally unpopular for the ways in which they were passed. In regards to the healthcare bill when Speaker Pelosi (D-CA) said that the House must pass the bill to discover what was in it, it earned no favors for the Democrats. Many voters simply felt that members of the House voted blindly and therefore did not consider their district and could not be trusted to vote as a member of Congress. The Democrats, as the majority party, took the brunt of this dislike.

Second point: Overall I felt that the Republicans over-performed my expectations of them in the House, Governorships, and State Legislatures, but under-performed in the Senate. In my predictions that I made in the week leading up to Election Day I called all but two races, Colorado and Nevada, which both remained with the incumbents. As to why Republicans lost those two races the answer: the Tea Party. Republicans may claim that without their support election victories would not have happened as greatly as they did; however, the Tea Party actually did more harm than good. The American people who voted out the Democrats were not Tea Party activists they were independents. So when the Tea Party raided Republican primaries and put out Ken Buck, Sharron Angle, and Christine O'Donnell in favor of more moderate options, Independents rejected them. Harry Reid and Michael Bennet had low approval ratings, the reason they won is simple. The Republican candidates were way too crazy out there. THIS ELECTION WAS NOT PRO-REPUBLICAN IT WAS NOT PRO-TEA PARTY, incumbents wanted moderates and the Tea Party is not moderate. That being said many tea-party candidates were elected, but just like the Democrats they replaced they better watch their backs, because the tide will come for them next.

Third point: The biggest news of the night in my opinion had to do with the states. Republicans picked up a lot of state legislatures and that is the big news no one is talking about, but it is probably more significant than every other election. PERIOD! Why? Because Republicans are now going to draw the lines in a lot of swing states for the congressional districts of the next ten years and the way it looks now that likely means Republicans will have the advantage in the House for a whole decade. I have seen some reports that predict the Democrats would require an election turnout similar to this past Tuesday to have a chance at winning the House in this new climate and to be honest after looking at how the districts are likely to be drawn I don't completely doubt it. Be wary in this coming year, if you follow politics.

Fourth point: While both Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) have been effective they are also really unpopular nationally and are therefore damaging the Democratic party image. Therefore my personal advice is that the Democrats get new leadership in both houses, regardless of the effectiveness they have among their fellow congressmen. My personal advice would be to have Senator Durbin (D-IL) lead the Senate and have Congressman Hoyer (D-MD) be the House Minority Leader. I think both of them are able, trusted, leaders that are much more popular and equally respected in their party (Heath Shuler (D-NC) = fail on that front). Keeping Pelosi and Reid in leadership will just continue negative perceptions of Congress.

So now that those points have been made I think it is best if I mention what I wanted out of this election. The main thing I wanted was moderation. I got in some respects, in others I didn't. The Tea Party made the Republican Party a rather annoying option and caused many partisan Democrats who I wanted removed to be replaced by equally partisan Republicans. In addition, moderate Republicans got primaried out by the Tea Party and moderate Democrats were taken out due to their vulnerable districts. So I am unhappy with the House. I wanted a lot of moderate Democrats to stay in office and there were a lot of Republicans who won I am disgusted with.

In the Senate I am happier since many of the extreme candidates lost. Senators tend to be more independent of the party line so I think the closeness in the balance of the power will achieve moderation that will likely be absent in the House. I look to the Senate to calm the House and be able to craft its legislation into something that both the American people approve of and the White House desires. Whether this will occur is unknown.

My final thought on the future: Obama has to go to the right or he will lose in 2012 (pending the Republican nominee, because I tell you now that I won't even entertain the idea of voting for Sarah Palin and Co.) As it stands I am unsure about where my vote will go in 2012. I am not overly impressed with the Obama administration, but I don't trust the Republicans to do what is best for the American people right now so I sit and await a nominee.

Last, but not least it is time for my annual naming of favorite and least favorite Senator. This ranking is more based on how I feel about the senator as a person and only partially based on policy.
FAVORITE: Dick Lugar (R-IN) - a moderate willing to work with the Democrats. I also want to add the following: Dear Tea Party People, DON'T PRIMARY CHALLENGE LUGAR!
LEAST FAVORITE: Jim DeMint (R-SC) - a bitter partisan who is actually killing his party's chances in the future, what a great person... not... CLOSE SECOND: Jeff Session (R-AL) for being a total a-hole to judicial nominees.
avatar
The Prez

Posts : 1818
Join date : 2009-06-17
Age : 27
Location : Pewaukee, Wisconsin or Champaign, Illinois

View user profile https://www.youtube.com/user/DamnCrappyProduction

Back to top Go down

- Similar topics
Share this post on: diggdeliciousredditstumbleuponslashdotyahoogooglelive

Post-Election Analysis :: Comments

avatar

Post on Sat Nov 06, 2010 11:13 pm by strangerthanfiction

May I just point out that Rand Paul is incredibly extreme and he still won? >.< I know you said "many extreme candidates" and not "all of them," but... still. Goodbye, Department of Education. It's been nice knowing you.

Back to top Go down

avatar

Post on Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:01 am by J-Mads

But it hasn't been nice knowing them

Back to top Go down

avatar

Post on Sun Nov 07, 2010 12:14 pm by strangerthanfiction

it would also be nice to know what time it is

Back to top Go down

avatar

Post on Sun Nov 07, 2010 6:28 pm by The Prez

It is 4:28 Central Standard Time

Back to top Go down

avatar

Post on Sun Nov 07, 2010 6:34 pm by The Prez

Also, the Republicans are not going to be able to dismantle the Department of Education. They have not the votes, nor do they have total support of the party.

Back to top Go down

Post  by Sponsored content

Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum