Thoughts on the election results

[resqgeek]

Perhaps it's because the outcome of the congressional race in my district was entirely predictable, but I find myself without any strong emotional reaction to the results of Tuesday's elections. There may be additional factors at work, as well.

I've been listening to the "My History Can Beat Up Your Politics" podcast (http://www.myhistorycanbeatupyourpolitics.com) for several months now, and Bruce Carlson, the podcaster, provides an excellent and thoughtful analysis of the history of American politics. One of the things he's been emphasizing for weeks is that it is entirely normal for the President's party to lose seats in Congress in the mid-term elections. In fact, it is so common that the opposite result can be considered an anomaly. So, in a sense, what happened on Tuesday is an entirely normal and predictable result of American politics. While the rhetoric of this years campaigns certainly ranks among some of the nastiest, the outcome seems to be entirely within the predictable range, based on historical results. So, the changes on Capitol Hill did not really surprise me.

Furthermore, I'm not entirely convinced that the change will be a bad thing. While the Republicans (in particular the supporters of the "Tea Party" movement) will crow about their victory, the reality is that they will not have sufficient numbers to over-ride a presidential veto. The Republican majority in the House will NOT be able to fully dictate the legislative agenda. They will need to convince the President to sign their bills, and will need to accommodate the Democrats in the Senate. Furthermore, now that they control the House, they will need to demonstrate that they can actually accomplish something. Hopefully, this will lead to a more bi-partisan dialog and a reduction in the divisive rhetoric of the last few years. Perhaps I'm being overly optimistic, but while there may be an initial showdown between the two parties, I believe that once we get beyond that, we may find a more pragmatic atmosphere settling over Capitol Hill.

So, while I'm sympathetic to the hand-wringing of many of my friends, I'm not sure that the election results are the sign of impending disaster that some people seem to think they are. Time will tell, but I sincerely hope that this will be a turning point towards a return towards a somewhat less dysfunctional political debate.

Comments

[benpj.livejournal.com]

Despite the [I don't like 'liberal' as an adjective here; I would more say 'sensationalist'] press coverage of the more 'radical right' candidates, a lot of the Republicans running were pretty qualified, respectable candidates; let's hope they can sway the party more than the louder voices in the campaign. In any event, I have to get some tickets to the tanning salon so that I can fit in with the new political climate...

[skyring.livejournal.com]

Rather like recent outcomes in the UK and Australia, with no one party having a clean sweep. Perhaps dialogue and compromise will rule.

In theory, Australian Senate elections are held every three years, with Senators sitting for six year terms, half elected each time. There is no obligation for Representatives elections - a general election - to be held concurrently.

In practice what happens with a half-Senate election is that the voters feel free to lodge a protest vote against the government, secure in the knowledge that they won't change the leader, but they'll give him (or her) a bloody good reason to listen and shape up.

So Prime Ministers take good care to call House and Senate elections simultaneously. The government rarely holds a majority in the Senate, but they don't want the difference to be so large that it is unworkable.