Dems take Congress '06 - GOP benefits '08?

[Keystone Phil]

I thought I'd start this topic after reading Nym's post:

That's true; the chances of the Republicans winning the Presidency in 2008 would probably be increased if the Democrats take control of Congress this year.

Do you agree with this? If so, why? And by taking Congress I mean both houses (that may seem obvious but I wanted to make sure it was understood).

[TomC]

I'm not sure if it's true overall. I think the Dems could gain points by attacking the GOP congress, especially if Abrahamoff -like scandals continue. That argument for voting Dem becomes less true if Dems gain congress. I believe the opposite worked for Clinton in 1996.

On the other hand, a Democrat victory in 2006 could be seen as a shifting of powers and could help the Dems gain traction.

I can say that I'm more likely to consider the Republican nominee if the Dems control congress (not likely I'd vote Rep, but possible if the nominee is a moderate like Giuliani or McCain.)

[Gabu]

If nothing else, it could make the GOP get more desperate in '08 and rally around McCain, who would almost be assured victory, instead of someone more conservative.  If the GOP retains control in 2006, on the other hand (or, Boss Tweed-style worst-case scenario for the Dems, actually gains more seats), then there is a distinct chance that they might get overconfident and go with a hard conservative while the Democrats might be the ones to rally around a moderate like McCain because they badly want to win.

[A18]

I think presidents are more popular when there's divided government.

[Sam Spade]

Simple fact is that what the House and Senate can do and what the people think they can do are often very different in that the people expect more out of their leaders than is probably realistic.  It's part of the reason why change always happens in the US and it will happen again and again and again.

Nevertheless, I think we'd be lying to ourselves if we were to say that a key factor in Clinton's re-election was the GOP takeover in 1994.  Still, it is hard to predict what will necessarily happen, but even if the Dems take over the House (the more likely of the two to be taken), it would most likely benefit the GOP in some way, even if it was very minor, come 2008.  Perhaps the benefit would come in reenergizing the base, who knows right now?

[© tweed]

I like Gabu's analysis.

If the GOP gets castrated in 2006, McCain is an absolute lock for the nomination if he runs.  If he doesn't run though, the race could be wide open because I don't see Giuliani being tolerable at all to the christio-fascists.

If they hold their ground/gain seats, a traditional conservative like Allen becomes the favorite.

[Nym90]

Gabu pretty much hit the nail on the head.

If the GOP loses control of Congress, they will probably move more toward the middle which would help their chances in 2008, much as Clinton moved towards the middle after the GOP won control in 1994, thus helping his chances of reelection.

However, it's far from a certainty that the Republicans would do this; like the Democrats have now, there would probably be a lot of conservatives who would argue that they lost because they abandoned conservative principles and that they need to move further right.

Overall, though I feel the GOP would be more likely to moderate after a loss than to move right.

[TomC]

Overall, though I feel the GOP would be more likely to moderate after a loss than to move right.

With both parties having essentially open nominations for the White House, it'll be interesting to see whee the moderates go on primary day.

[Inmate Trump]

The GOP would have less chances to screw things up like they have been.  I guess that's one way it could benefit them.

[WalterMitty]

did anyone see pelosi on meet the press?

it was awful.

i happen to like pelosi, but i also see that she has zero leadership qualities.  she may be a fine person, but she has no business being speaker of the house.

[Max]

I think presidents are more popular when there's divided government.

Were the Republican Presidents from the 1950's to 1994 popular than the Democratic Presidents?

[Gustaf]

I think presidents are more popular when there's divided government.

Were the Republican Presidents from the 1950's to 1994 popular than the Democratic Presidents?

Yes, it would over-all seem so. Eisenhower was very popular, Nixon was also pretty popular until Watergate. Reagan of course was idolized. Bush and Ford were less so, but they weren't really elected because of personal qualities anyway. Carter on the other hand was wildly impopular, Clinton was until 1994, LBJ was for most of his time as well. Not even Kennedy was as popular as people think.

[Defarge]

Aside from the Republican party being forced to look either left or right, as many have described already, it would really come down to what the Democrats would do in control of the Senate.  If they're stupid (as we often are), and decide to start impeachment proceedings, the GOP will very much benifit from a Democratic takeover.  Meanwhile, if a Democratic Congress is able to present a unified agenda, and are able to achieve measure legislative victories, any GOP benefits may well be nullified.

[kashifsakhan]

I like Gabu's analysis.

If the GOP gets castrated in 2006, McCain is an absolute lock for the nomination if he runs.  If he doesn't run though, the race could be wide open because I don't see Giuliani being tolerable at all to the christio-fascists.

If they hold their ground/gain seats, a traditional conservative like Allen becomes the favorite.

i agree... on the otherhand, what will the democrat ticket look like if that happens.

[zorkpolitics]

If the Democrats take over congress, they'll accomplish three things:
1) Multiple investigations of the Bush administration, which will be perceived as partisan, mean, and vindictive
2) The Democrats will be tagged as a highly partisan do nothing Congress
3) They will end the discord in the Republican Party and unite Republicans to defeat the Democrats in 2008

All of which will lead to a McCain Presidency..

[kashifsakhan]

If the Democrats take over congress, they'll accomplish three things:
1) Multiple investigations of the Bush administration, which will be perceived as partisan, mean, and vindictive
2) The Democrats will be tagged as a highly partisan do nothing Congress
3) They will end the discord in the Republican Party and unite Republicans to defeat the Democrats in 2008

All of which will lead to a McCain Presidency..

1) No
2) Yes
3) Yes