The way yesterday's elections seem to be being interpreted is as an expression of voter outrage against incumbent officer-holders in both parties, as opposition to "Washington" and to the "Establishment." I haven't heard it claimed to be a major victory for Republicans, and also certainly not for Democrats or progressives.
The main interest shown is in what these primary elections seem to foretell about the "real" Congressional elections upcoming in November. Generally speaking, it has been thought that the Republicans would gain back some seats. Apparently it is usual for that to happen in non-presidential election years. But, in addition, there is some feeling that there is a lot of unhappiness with Barack Obama's "secular-socialist" government and specific policies, like health care reform.
But right now, I guess, the tea leaves are apparently not very revealing.
Opinion polls show that respect for Congress is very limited now. And that is as it should be. But that is hardly a call to throw out incumbents, to vote against anyone holding office. Yes, the Congress, hasn't done anything like enough about the nation's problems, but that is mostly because of the Republican strategy of preventing anything good from happening while Obama is president and the Democrats have a Congressional majority.
I received one of those Republican "fake census" surveys, which is so interesting, since of course I am not Republican, and since some Republicans actually have been opposed to the census, regarding it as too intrusive. But the Republican fake census is a heck of a lot more intrusive than the real thing, it is much longer and asks overtly political questions and seeks contributions, too. One of the many questions was something like--"what do you think of having the government entirely controlled by the Democrats?"
Which of course, they don't. Under traditional rules, perhaps, that would be a fair statement. But the Republicans have worked hard, threatening filibusters at every opportunity, to make it necessary to have 60 or more Senators in support of any measure, not a regular numerical majority of 50. The result is that they, and not the Democrats, have been the controlling party in the Senate and, by extension, the Congress as a whole. What we have been getting is the Republican preference for ineffectual, very confrontational, and fundamentally dishonest governmental inaction.
Anyhow, anyone who is upset with the recent situation ought to be voting against Republicans. And it doesn't make much sense to vote against someone simply on the basis that they are holding office now.
We will see how this all turns out, of course. I wish there had been more discussion of the "specifics" of the various contests. But I find it hard to believe that, come November, the electorate will simply say "a plague on both their houses," and vote against incumbent Democrats and Republicans in equal measure. If they do, they are poorly informed, or stupid. Often I do feel critical of the electorate, but really, I give them more credit than that!
Comments