“Fatigue” or “Two Futures”

Ed Kilgore has a short and fascinating post at Washington Monthly today.  In it, he observes that following 2014, Republicans largely convinced themselves that the political landscape was tilting to the right.

A lot of Republicans came out of their 2014 landslide fully expecting to keep the party going right into the presidential cycle. There were a lot of reasons to doubt that optimism, from the change to a presidential cycle with less positive turnout patterns for the GOP, to the end of a six-year midterm dynamic that was sure to fade, to an improving economy.

Ed points to a Pew poll that shows the Republican party is viewed extremely negatively by Americans to suggest that the landscape is not favorable for Republicans.

He concludes by saying:

Any way you slice it, any thoughts by Republicans that the landscape is tilting in their direction in this cycle really come down to the fairly abstract notion of an electorate that thinks it’s time for a change after the Obama administration. If contrary to that notion this turns out to be a “two futures” election in which voters are simply comparing the two parties and their candidates, the landscape just isn’t tilting Right.

In essence, Republicans are counting on “Obama” fatigue but Democrats will try to make it a “two futures” campaign.  In 2008 and 2012, Democrats were very successful at the “two futures” approach.  I hope they repeat that success.

  1. #1 by Richard Warnick on July 23, 2015 - 5:10 pm

    I’m not familiar with the “two futures” concept, however the name “Clinton” does not equal “future” in the minds of many. I didn’t vote for Obama in 2008, but I did prefer him to the possible Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton scenario. Are we really going to have a Bush vs. Clinton election in 2016?

  2. #2 by Larry Bergan on July 23, 2015 - 5:25 pm

    Right now my two futures would be Bernie Sanders/Howard Dean. 🙂

  3. #3 by Larry Bergan on July 23, 2015 - 7:12 pm

    This is going to be harsh, but there are times when I think that a lot of today’s Democrats are willing to let Republicans win. Life is good for them when they can pretend to fight “the other side of the isle”.

    I haven’t made a secret of my distrust of voting machines. I’m not really sure how Obama won both elections, but I DO know that the Democrats in Washington never raised a concern about defunding ACORN, based on a phony, heavily edited, video of a fake pimp which was all over Fox “news”, when it supposedly exposed democrat “voter fraud”. All ACORN was doing, was signing black people up to vote. Apparently they were doing a damn good job too, which lasted through two elections. The information I have tells me that’s what happened.

    I trust Brad Friedman, “Truthout”, and the two guys who wrote this article, who have been heavily involved in this story about election – not voter – fraud. Let’s hope the GOP hasn’t refined their ability to steal elections since 2012. 🙁

    • #4 by Richard Warnick on July 24, 2015 - 9:17 am

      Obama won because it wasn’t a close election, both times. They can only get away with the “black box” thing if the election results fall within the polling margin of error (2-3%).

      2008 Obama 52.9% McCain 45.7% Difference 7.2%
      2012 Obama 51.1% Romney 47.2% Difference 3.9%

      Of course, in presidential elections it’s the individual state margins that really matter, I just don’t have time to list them.

  4. #5 by Larry Bergan on July 23, 2015 - 7:16 pm

    Everybody should know by now, that Democrats got more votes in the house then Republicans did. Gerrymandering works, but so do machines, IMO.

  5. #6 by brewski on July 23, 2015 - 10:33 pm

    Remind me again how is it that the Republicans gained control of all of those state houses in the first place in order to even be in the position of being able to Gerrymander.

    • #7 by Larry Bergan on July 23, 2015 - 11:04 pm

      Brewski said:

      Remind me again how is it that the Republicans gained control of all of those state houses in the first place in order to even be in the position of being able to Gerrymander.

      I can’t and neither can you. That’s why they call it “black box voting”.

      Should we have a way to tell how people voted? Simple enough question.

      • #8 by brewski on July 24, 2015 - 6:56 am

        The answer is, it was the 2010 midterm elections right after the disgusting corrupt fraud con of Obamacare was passed and there was a giant revolt by the people and the GOP won all over the country as a protest against Obamacare and against the Dem corrupt machine.

        Elections have consequences.

  6. #9 by brewski on July 23, 2015 - 10:34 pm

    There are currently 31 Republicans, 18 Democrats, and one independent that hold the office of governor in the states.

  7. #10 by brewski on July 23, 2015 - 10:34 pm

    You can’t Gerrymander a statewide election.

  8. #11 by Larry Bergan on July 24, 2015 - 11:32 am

    Darn it, I did it again!

    For a long time the spam filter was only one page of spam. Today it was two, but I pushed the delete button before I saw the last four comments. Sorry if I deleted an actual comment. 🙁

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: