Anti-Bush, but no Democratic Revolution
Chris Black
Issue date: 11/15/06 Section: Commentary
- Page 1 of 2 next >
On November 7, 2006, the Democrats captured control of Congress for the first time since 1994. The 110th Congress of the United States will thus consist of a Senate with 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, 1 Independent Democrat, and 1 Independent Socialist (the latter two caucusing with Democrats), and a House of Representatives with at least 230 Democrats and around 200 Republicans.
As I said in my last article a few weeks ago, the time for the Democrats to win a majority was either now or never. Well, the time to seize Election Day came, and the Democrats seized it. Thus, the two-party system we have been familiar with has remained intact.
The major thing that the American people seemed to want when they went to the polls was a change in President Bush's war policy in Iraq. It was a frustration with the status quo; there was far too little progress being made on the ground for the American people to justify keeping a relatively complacent Congress.
But what should not be read from the election results is a major national re-alignment. Essentially, it was an anti-Bush protest vote. As I also said in my last article, history favors the Democrats according to the "six-year itch" rule. It is simply normal for a sixth-year incumbent president's party to lose seats, and even chambers themselves. As CBS News journalist Dick Meyer says, "Since World War II, the parties that controlled the White House for two terms have lost an average of 29 House seats and six Senate seats in their second midterm elections. This [2006] election fits tidily into that pattern."
Contrary to what some liberal bloggers and sensationalistic journalists believe, the country remains politically much like it has been for the past decade. In 2004, exit polls showed that 21 percent of voters called themselves liberal, 34 percent said they were conservative and 45 percent called themselves moderate. This time around in 2006, the exit polls said that the voters were 21 percent liberal, 32 percent conservative, and 47 percent moderate. In other words, with the numbers virtually unchanged, many moderates who voted Republican in 2004 sided this time with the Democrats in 2006. Instead of being liberal converts, they are still self-described moderates.
As I said in my last article a few weeks ago, the time for the Democrats to win a majority was either now or never. Well, the time to seize Election Day came, and the Democrats seized it. Thus, the two-party system we have been familiar with has remained intact.
The major thing that the American people seemed to want when they went to the polls was a change in President Bush's war policy in Iraq. It was a frustration with the status quo; there was far too little progress being made on the ground for the American people to justify keeping a relatively complacent Congress.
But what should not be read from the election results is a major national re-alignment. Essentially, it was an anti-Bush protest vote. As I also said in my last article, history favors the Democrats according to the "six-year itch" rule. It is simply normal for a sixth-year incumbent president's party to lose seats, and even chambers themselves. As CBS News journalist Dick Meyer says, "Since World War II, the parties that controlled the White House for two terms have lost an average of 29 House seats and six Senate seats in their second midterm elections. This [2006] election fits tidily into that pattern."
Contrary to what some liberal bloggers and sensationalistic journalists believe, the country remains politically much like it has been for the past decade. In 2004, exit polls showed that 21 percent of voters called themselves liberal, 34 percent said they were conservative and 45 percent called themselves moderate. This time around in 2006, the exit polls said that the voters were 21 percent liberal, 32 percent conservative, and 47 percent moderate. In other words, with the numbers virtually unchanged, many moderates who voted Republican in 2004 sided this time with the Democrats in 2006. Instead of being liberal converts, they are still self-described moderates.
Be the first to comment on this story