It's The Stupid, Stupid

On thinking more about why my predictions were too pessimistic for the Dems, and having a read around the usual suspects I've come to some conclusions about where I went wrong.

I'm cribbing here mainly from one of the very scholarly folks on Real Clear Politics, whose name I've lost. Anyhow, this gent and I had much the same predictions, Dems get 222 in the House and 49 in the Senate.

The suggestion is that we took the poll data and moderated it to allow for the structural advantages that the GOP had. Money, redistricting, get out the vote, organisation, and did I mention money? Here's the thing; we assumed that all the GOP candidates in the seats in play would make compentent use of the money etc. that they had access to. Turns out many of them took all that scattered it into the wind (I could use a blunter Australian expression here but this is a family channel, right).

The lesson is that not all candidates are equally effective and that the structural advantages don't avail much (especially in a bad year) if the candidate is just to stupid to use them properly.

And of course candidates in that category are now no longer in office. Which is as it should be. Which is not to say there weren't some OK congress members who did everything right and still got run over by the train.

And There They Go

Well, well. I was wrong. The polls were mostly right and we have ourselves a ball game.

A takeover of both houses is a huge deal ( in spite of conservative backfilling about the winning Dems being pretty conservative really). A whole new set of opportunities and threats come into play with plenty of scope for either side to make a stand or blow it big time.

How is all this playing in Aus? Well it's got our conserative Prime Minister and Bush loyalist, John Howard, pretty nervous at least as far as security policy goes. Domestically it may not count for a great deal although it will give the other side of the aisle some heart. Which they need.

One issue is that free trade is pretty much a bipartisan position here and some of the new congresspeople are sounding pretty protectionist. That's a worry.

Anyhow. On with the show and start picking up your markers for 08 and the big roulette wheel.

Here We Are

Well, the day has come. I write at 6:00 AMish ET on election day (aka 10:00 PM Australian Eastern Summer Tme).

So, I said several weeks ago I wanted to see two real bad days for the Republicans before I would believe in Democrat takeovers in both houses. They've had about 1.8 real bad days.

The polling and analysis I consider respectable (Real Clear Politics, Rothenberg, CNN/Time) are giving a pretty good shot to the Dems in the house and a long shot in the senate.

So, I guess it's money down time for us amatuers . Here is my best guess of the results and why.

House : Democrats 222 : Repubilicans 213

Why : Same old story, money, encumbancy, redistricting. People hav been getting excited about a wavw and there is enouigh there for a majority but...The wave is way to small to break through the buffering that all those things provide the Republicans, and produce big results. It was there, maybe, for a while, but good economic news, John Kerry and scare tactics have held the line.

Senate : Democrats 49 : Republicans 51

Why : Montana seems like its going towards the Republicans, and the odds of the Dems getting both Virginia and Missouri are just to long to believe in.

I'll say this. If the Democrats take the senate they should carry Harold Ford, Clare McCaskill and Jim Webb into the chamber shoulder high, with ticker tape. They have all been better than their party machine, and better than it derserved.

Oh, and if that happens the Republicans should see to it that George Allan and Bob Corker are taken out into the Mall, tied down and whupped. Hard. They would've failed their party and they have noone to blame but themselves.

And finally, regardless of the outcome, the Dems should make it clear that John Kerry is not allowed to speak in public without permission. Ever.