Just trying to sort this out. If we say that 40 of the House seats gained were because of the economy, that leaves 20 as repudiation of Democratic overreach. So what conclusion should Republican leaders draw? "Everyone out there wants us to fight the Democratic policies! We will (try to) push through conservative policies, because everyone supports them."

Or should they conclude, "There's a base that supports conservative policies, and they supported us very powerfully. There is also a sizable chunk of the electorate (40 seats worth) that is volatile; that doesn't necessarily care that much about Democratic or Republican policies, but will just throw the bums out if the economy is down. We should try to introduce the policies we believe in, but should remember that a big chunk of the electorate voted for us for a different reason."

It seems to me that we are so upset with the Democrats, and contemptuous of their base, because they made the first choice in 2008. Presumably we should have more sense. But what does having more sense tell us to do?

MikeR, if many voters cast state of the economy ballots (as opposed to issues, principles, character- based choices), then conservative and classically liberal Repubs have to convince the Establishment Repub apparachtiks and the pocketbook voting portion of the electorate that good times cannot be sustained under any FDR/EU Progressive or Bush Compassionate(TM) agenda. The left leaning into the wind Democrats promise too much to specific groups, rob Peter to pay Paul, and then deliver too little-- at best. Their big gov programs, entitlements, crony bailouts and industry captured "reforms" are not affordable even under the best of economic conditions blah blah

It's imperative, though, to sneak in Principle re the architecture of our country's best functioning by repeating the mantra that limited government is better governance, and do this every time a cam is put in front of their faces, at constituent meetings, to each other, and in print. So should we (do i get credit for this?)

Republicans have played a go-along big part in this financial and entitlement mentality mess we've got, and need to show lots of Constitutional fortitude, starting now.

We're waiting.

Sounds reasonable.
By the way, have you been following the Connecticut governor's race? Awesomely weird. Even now, after midnight Wednesday, NYT Election Coverage shows Foley ahead by 9000 votes, with about 16000 votes left to be counted (98.5% counted). And yet, the Conn. Sec. of State has announced that Mulloy, the Democrat, has won. In fact, by more than 3000 votes, so that we don't even need to waste anyone's time with a recount! Pretty impressive. Even better, both Mulloy and Foley has formed their own transition teams, each one claiming to have won. In fact, Mulloy claims that he actually won by 11,000 votes - which should be mathematically impossible.

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)