Monday, October 18, 2010
Lunchtime reading: Handicapping the Senate
If you, like me, do not have the time to follow politics as sport, this short article handicapping the chances for GOP control of the Senate amounts to a useful scorecard. Refer back here at election day and see how it all came out.
2 Comments:
By 
Dawnfire82, at
Mon Oct 18, 12:53:00 PM:
I maintain that the best political result for the Republicans is majority in the House, minority in the Senate.
This will give the Republicans, bolstered by their new cadre of Tea Party style firebrands, control of the purse strings, but not of Congressional policy at large. Without a true Congressional majority, Republicans will be less likely to engage in spoiled ruling class behavior (like pork) and they will still have an opposition to work against. Gridlock is more likely to result than reform, 1) stabilizing the law a bit, and 2) setting up the elections for 2012 where a second Tea Party wave will destroy Obama and transfer control of the Senate as well, so that the new president and Congress will be able to erase virtually everything carried out by the old one, and possess the popular mandate to do it.
I don't know if it would be better or worse with Reid still in the picture; he's an awful leader and an overall slimeball (i.e. great to run against) but it'll be disheartening to see him survive for another 6 years.
By 
, at
Mon Oct 18, 02:25:00 PM:
The thing about a closely divided Senate that will just drive me batshit crazy is that the balance will be tipped issue by issue by the squishy RINO's, voting one day for the Democrats and one day against. Chinese water torture is what it'll feel like, I tell ya...
