From Doug Mataconis comes the latest from Larry Sabato:
After examining all 435 House races for 2010, the Crystal Ball projects that Republicans will gain between 20 and 30 seats. While this is nothing to sneeze at, especially given that it would be the largest gain for congressional Republicans since 1994, it still puts them short of the 40 seat pick-up they need to take back the House.
Doug concludes:
Part of the problem the GOP faces is that it suffered such big losses in 2006 and 2008 that it’s going to take nothing short of a political miracle for it to regain control in 2010.
True dat, and they deserved those drubbings after years of out of control pork barrel spending and worse.
But I think there’s a chance for a real groundswell here that Sabato discounts, and it will come down to two questions: Just how angry are older voters, now that their Medicare is under threat; and just how apathetic are younger voters, now that their hip young president is in office?
And even just a couple percentage points of increased turnout for suburban voters — disappointed in the stimulus, sickened by cap & tax, and worried about the health care overhaul — could make the difference in many races. Enough for 40 seats or more to change parties? I think that depends entirely on whether or not this Overreach Congress can slow down and let the American people catch its breath.
Two other things before we finish up here — one in favor of a Republican victory next year, one not.
Unlike 1994, the Republicans have no Newt Gingrich to lead a “revolution.” They don’t even have much of a platform — or at least not one they’ve marketed with even half the success Gingrich enjoyed in ’94. They’ve got until spring, maybe, to come up with one.
Also, you can almost always trust Larry Sabato to have rock solid numbers, certainly more often than most any other pollster. However… in the 2004 presidential race, Sabato really let his heart get in the way of clear thinking. He predicted a narrow John Kerry electoral college victory, even though Sabato’s own poll numbers didn’t add up to that. Since then, I’ve come to trust his conclusions less than I trust his numbers. Keep that in mind when you read his stuff, or see him on TV.
So what will happen in 2010? Ask me again — in 2011.
Steve,
The question I didn’t address in my post is whether GOP deserves to have control of Congress back. Given their record from 1994 through 2006, I’m not so sure the answer is yes.
I know it’s sad, but I keep hearing the Everly Brothers singing “Dream, Dream, Dream” in my ear.
Well, and this is all a passive swing to the Republicans. They haven’t done anything to deserve this swing. Yet.
So if they do actually start leading on key issues, I would have some hope. Until that happens, I doubt they’ll gain enough seats.
Doug —
Ain’t that the truth? The first two sessions (’95-’99) weren’t terrible. But by the spring of ’99 the leadership had figured out that the tech bubble meant they could abandon spending restraint — and, boy, did they.
If anything he is being too generous… I see Republicans breaking even or gaining no more than 10 seats…
Republicans don’t deserve to take Congress back, but the Democrats deserve to have it even less. And most of us do not deserve what both parties are doing to us.
Doug,
I don’t think the question is whether the GOP deserves to have control, it’s if we can afford to NOT give the GOP control.
We may be in a position of choosing the party that’s walking to socialism over the party that’s running to socialism, but that’s our only choice. Third parties just don’t win in our system.
Now, depending on who those 40 new congressmen are we may see a big change in the GOP. The leadership may be pretty similar, but they’d have to keep in mind the “Red-dogs”. If we get the right kind we can buy time to actually develop fiscal conservative leadership. Of course if those 40 are just more of the same we as a nation deserve what we get.
I think the only way to get off the track we’re on is to change how we conduct politics. Right now politicians just trade sound-bites like Pokemon cards to encourage their political blocs and discourage their opponents. There’s no debate. No attempt to show that one set of beliefs is inferior to another.
Yarrrr –
As Darcy said, they certainly haven’t done anything to deserve it, and I agree. What we very might well see is nothing more exciting than depressed turnout numbers.
Steve,
The 90′s era GOP Congress was neutered the minute Gingrich decided to play a game of chicken with Bill Clinton over the budget. Say what you will about Slick Wille, but he was a much smarter politician than Newt and Newt was totally outplayed in that whole government shutdown saga.
DirtyBlueShirt,
Based on the GOP’s record during the late 90s to 2006, the fact that the same people will be in the leadership if the GOP returns to power, and who the Committee Chairmen are likely to be, I have absolutely no confidence that the GOP will actually be the limited government party it pretends to be
Hasn’t Congress, under Democrat control, held the lowest approval rating in the last decade or two, worse than Bush’s approval rating? I’m shocked both of these parties are still in power.
Doug, if you can’t see the difference between having The Zombie of Nob Hill as Speaker, and having someone else, with a smaller majority if a Democrat, or with a new GOP majority if not, then I don’t think you’re looking very hard.
Doug,
I’m under no illusions that a GOP dominated 112th Congress will be limited government, but it will be an improvement. Especially if the GOP leadership owes their chairmanships to limited government junior congressmen. It won’t fix the problem, but it will stabilize the patient.
Then we need to move on to phase II: Primary challenges of the “big government, but not as big as the Dems (Yet)” Republicans. Start knocking off a few big names that aren’t helpful in reversing the last 60 years of gov’t growth and we’ll find the survivors much more amenable.
Of course none of this is going to work unless we can start convincing people to stop voting in favor of their short-term interests and take a longer view. That work needs to start now.