In the course of my day job and generally obsessive absorption of conservative media (to beat your enemy you've got to know him), this recent tiff on the right over immigration reminded me of Rush Limbaugh's insistence that the fight over Harriet Miers was a conservative "crackdown" and not a "crack up", and it would not hurt the 2006 election.
Charles Cook, the influential nonpartisan analyst of Congressional elections, said: 'Right now, if I had to bet would the Democrats take the House and Senate back, I'd say no. But are the odds a heck of a lot better than they were three months ago or six months ago? Heck, yes.'" I'll give you a little reality spin on this. There are 435 seats in the House of Representatives, and all of these districts out there in the states, you've heard the term gerrymandering. What has happened here -- and this happens whoever the majority is -- is every ten years you rewrite the districts and so forth. You know how many of these 435 seats in the House are competitive? At most, 20. By the way, a lot of that is thanks to campaign finance reform (the Incumbent Protection Act of whatever year it was authored) 20 seats in the House -- 20, out of 435 -- may be competitive, and the Democrats would have to win almost all of them to get their majority back, and what their thinking is that the number of competitive seats is now on the rise, because there is so much anger and sadness and distrust at the Republicans. Now, if you go back and look at all these things, "the response to Hurricane Katrina, war in Iraq, and soaring gasoline prices," none of these things were ever as bad as they were portrayed, and that is becoming more and more known as the days pass.
Of course you homegamers know that the Dems gained 7 seats in the Senate and 31 in the House in the 2006 election. And this, I think, is part of why cons are having a tough go online. They haven't realigned to a media world where people are actually paying attention to them and making note of their predictions and proclamations. Limbaugh's been on the air 20-something years but it wasn't really until folks started listening to him that the clear disconnect between what he said several months ago and what actually happened became clear. To his sheep he's always going to be able to pull a "move along, nothing to see here" act, but to anyone who pays attention for a second, like with the columnists and politicians and pols who keep requesting six months more of dead soldiers to prove their point in Iraq, they have no standing.
In a strong way, they are pwned.