Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

May 28 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew


New on NRO . . .
Close
Day of the Democratic Dead
This election is a referendum not on Obama personally, but on Obama as liberal progressive.

By Henry Olsen


Archive Latest RSS Send
Text  

For Delaware Democrat Chris Coons, it’s fitting that Election Day comes two days after Halloween, running as he is against that sometime dabbler in witchcraft, Christine O’Donnell. For hundreds of his partisan brothers and sisters, however, another holiday reference is more appropriate: Mexico’s Day of the Dead. Today, our neighbors to the south will begin celebrating the memories of their deceased family and friends. Tomorrow, our neighbors to the left will mourn the demise of hundreds of candidates whose careers will be consigned to the political graveyard, few of which will rise to take bodily form again.

How did it come to this? Just two years ago, all things seemed possible for Democrats. In possession of congressional majorities larger than any since 1980, led by a seemingly historic figure who had just won a larger share of the popular vote than any non-incumbent Democrat since FDR in 1932, Democrats forecast an American political sky that would remain endlessly blue. Today, Democrats are headed for a reversal of fortune of proportions not seen since the landslide elections of 1946 and 1948.

Advertisement

How strong will this reversal be? I predict that Republicans will gain between 55 and 72 seats in the House; my best estimate is 64. That will give the GOP 243 seats, its highest total since the election of 1946 and the second highest since the Great Depression. No living Democrat has served in a House of Representatives with as few Democrats as will inhabit that body come January.

Furthermore, I predict that the GOP will gain nine Senate seats, giving it 50 members. That means the Republicans will nearly capture the slate in the seats up for grabs, losing only West Virginia in a nailbiter among the close seats in the polls. I would not at all be surprised if one Democrat — perhaps Jim Webb of Virginia — subsequently switches parties or changes which party he caucuses with to give the GOP operational control of the Senate. (Those interested in my specific seat-by-seat predictions should keep their eye on the Corner.)

Many will blame the economy for this situation, arguing that no party in the midst of the worst economic crisis in at least 30, and perhaps 80, years could have satisfied the electorate. There is truth to this, as the party in power always suffers at the polls during a significant recession.

But this explanation goes only so far. The anger, disappointment, and disgust that the voters will shower on the Obama administration and the Democratic congressional leadership is unusually deep. The electorate is reacting at a much more visceral level.

In my private election-prediction memo two years ago, I wrote the following words: “Democrats are split between progressives, who seek a radical and swift move to the economic left, and centrists, who want to re-regulate and ‘spread the wealth around’ but nowhere near the degree of the progressives. . . . Who will win these intra-party fights? We don’t know, and which faction wins and to what extent will largely determine both the health of our nation and the possibility of a quick Republican resurgence.”

We now know that the progressives, despite their dissatisfaction with many elements of President Obama’s agenda, largely won those fights. The result is that large segments of the American electorate feel that the administration and Democrats in Congress don’t understand and don’t care to understand their aspirations and fears. This sentiment is most keenly and strongly felt among conservative Republicans, but it is shared — for different reasons — by many nonconservatives. This sentiment is particularly strong among the white working class and among Catholics.

The development of this sentiment was not inevitable. President Obama took power with the strong support of most Americans, who hoped and believed he could make America whole again. Instead, in his deeds and in his words, in what he has done and in what he has failed to do, he has alienated the vast American middle.

Why did he do and say what he did? Why did those words and deeds alienate the American middle and working classes? Is there something inherent in progressive politics that is out of sync with American attitudes and aspirations?

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Next >
Text  

You Might Also Like...

Charen: Obama’s Education Hypocrisy -- Again

Krauthammer: The Nationals and the Joy of Winning

Trinko: Cruz Reaches for a Runoff



COMMENTS   3

EXPAND  

   11/01/10 13:19

Very detailed and interesting analysis. I am one of those in the "American working class". The author got a lot of it right but lost me when he made the statement that the Tea Party would make large moves that would go against the need for security among us "working class".
I am in the Tea Party and I have to tell you that most of us are looking for large moves... the kind that would take our country back home.
Our "small" little lives DO contain "risk". Buying a house, moving to another town or state, taking a new job, etc., these are high risk to us.
Some of us even leave everything and go on the mission field.
Those things are high stakes to us and we want to be able to do those things without somebody interfering!
We are willing to return to a country with less government and fewer bosses!
For the first time in my life I feel like I am being treated as a "lesser" person because I AM only "working class". Who wants an America that does that?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/01/10 18:41

Well said, Mr. Olsen.

I confess to thinking about it in simpler terms. It is clear to me that the US is the most successful nation in human history and that the success is based on the principles laid out in our founding documents. I'm not opposed to change, but radical and disruptive change of the best thing the world has ever seen isn't just something I oppose....I think it is insane.

And I know for an absolute fact that I am far from alone in that sentiment.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/01/10 20:08

Question was..."For the first time in my life I feel like I am being treated as a "lesser" person because I am only "working class". Who wants an America that does that?"

Answer is...Obama & his wellfare class. Those of us in the "working class" are not yet fully aware of his re-distribution of wealth schemes and what they mean (soon to be coupled with his re-distribution of debt schemes).

This (p)residency is so toxic, that it will likely take over four-hundred years to correct the dammage done. We're still the new kid (nation) on the block, so the above statement might sound far fetched, but it really isn't. The Chinese implement 500 year plans.

Who's going to reverse obama's racist sun tanning tax, and replace it with a hair braiding/straightening tax anyway (The leftist republicans, are not advertising that they would)? Who's going to let me buy a four pack of light bulbs (that do not contain mercury) for a buck fifty again, instead of twelve bucks? Who's going to reverse the "greeners" Cap & Trade policey, which will cost the average (working class) American household over $5,000 per year in new energy taxes? Show me which republican is running on helping us with that issue!

Will somebody help me here? There is a fringe-left-marxist-hate-America-party, then there is a fringe-left-burry-it-in-concrete-then-move-left-again-party. I just want to vote for somebody worth voting for, and I can't afford either one of them!

Lesser Person II

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact