Tonight, for the first time this election, I actually allowed myself to think that the Republicans might do very nicely, thank you. Logic tells me this election, like so many others, is going to be very close and the odds are about even that either side will prevail. But that little voice keeps piping up, you know, the one that always starts every sentence with, "What if. . .?"

First off, if the Republicans do win enough seats but only by small margins the Democrats will accuse them of all sorts of nefarious behavior and charges will be filed. (See the post about lawyers.) Of course, voters could be so weirded out by the "memorial service" there might be a couple of unexpected landslides. THat would be fun!

All right, supposing the elections are over, the Repubs did very well, the charges have been filed and found without merit and Bush starts getting his nominees approved and bills passed.

Do you know just how pissed off the Democrats are going to be???

It's bad enough now but if they lose ground there will be no stopping their evil deeds. They barely care about the country as it is, such a blow will send them further down that particular primrose path.

You know, when I was working in politics in New Orleans and pundit Ron Faucheux was still at Loyola University and working for us part-time, pols really cared about the city. Yeah, sure, they loved the power and the glory but they loved the city too. I think perhaps a few people still do. I don't know if pols cared about the country in those days because I was new to politics and focused on the local and state scene. I guess not when you think about Watergate. Was Eisenhower the last prez to care about the country? I think Kennedy did, up to a point. After all, he was in the Pacific and saw for himself that even the United States could be highly vulnerable to a foreign threat. I think Bush cares too. (It's a Texas thing!)

But I don't think the Clintons, McCauliffe, Mondale, Daschle and all the rest, I don't think any of them shive a git about the US, not really. I listened to Erskine Bowles tonight, with his fake countrified accent (his loss of a "G" at the end of "hurting" was WAAAAY too fake) and how he cares about working people. Listen, when your wife owns a textile factory with 16,000 people working in it, I'm tellin' ya, that's a sweatshop. The Bowles family cannot run such a business without exploiting the average worker. There's a commercial showing family home movies from when he was a small child. Doesn't he realize that such clips only emphasize what a privileged background he came from? He knows as much about being poor and working class as I do about being a supermodel. But Durham will go for him, count on it.

I fear that the Dems will be furious enough to REALLY stir up militant blacks. I can't think of any other weapon they could use so well. I mean, look at Belafonte. Maybe it's already started. And there's Barbra with her Wellstone crash conspiracy theories. Sheesh!

Very depressing.

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

Answers

if the democrats are on the losing end in this election you can count on them to be crying out over our loss of rights which are being taken away piece by piece with every homeland security issue.

Of course, these rights are the ones that we take for granted, but if we are not doing anything wrong why should we worry about it?

Like those three guys on the Florida highway, detained while their cars are searched because a woman in Georgia heard something...

No matter who wins, we lose. it's deciding how much we dare to lose that makes the choice clear. is it a clear choice?

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

gotta go get in line to vote. Yeah, I'm one of those that waited till today to do it.

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

7:15 am and I am home after voting with that long long ballot.

took less than five minutes and I didn't skip anything. 'course I read it over the last few days.

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

I guess I'm not a political animal because, for the life of me, I don't understand politics - I also don't like playing games.

I think the biggest thing hurting the Repubs right now is the economy and the loss of jobs. I have heard too many people down here say that they really hate what the Dems do, but at least under Clinton they had a job and a nice income. Logically, I think that the Repubs are letting the market fall down to where it really should be and then will start another bull market, but you can't allow the masses to be so broke in the mean time. I'm not sure I'm making a lot of sense here.

I agree with Barefoot about the homeland security act - that one really pisses me off, but the Dems would have initiated it under their watch, so I don't think it is really partisan.

I will admit that life under Regan was better for us - in spite of a major increase in our personal income taxes.

Around here I think that our stupid Dem governor is going to win again. The repubs didn't run someone that people could like - too much of a personal agenda.

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

OK, time for a rip-roaring Democrat response:

Even bigger deficit spending. Whee!

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

If the repubs get control over Washington, then it could actually hurt W's re-election bid, cuz he won't be able to blame those darns democrats on a failure to improve the country over the next few months.

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

I think some people realize that the September 11 attack cost us a lot of money and the subsequent cleaning up in Afghansitan also cost some money. Voila! Surplus all gone. What with the mil being reduced to using broomsticks for recruits cause there were no new rifles, it took a while to build up the stocks that Clinton depleted. You know, like tanks, planes, bullets, mortar shells, etc.

Brooks, what I'm afraid of is that the Dems will make sure there are problems in the country (think unions, strikes, labor disputes, e.g.) to try to get elected in 2004. They just don't seem to care about the country any more.

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

Well, the party leaders don't seem to, anyway.

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002

It's a tough call for me -- many of the candidates from both parties locally have engaged in name calling and negative campaigns -- children! I mainly voted so that I could vote against all the proposals that would raise my taxes and all the candidates who had a record of supporting tax increases. Unfortunately, that's most of them.

I'll bet a lot of voters in other states feel the same way -- that's why there are so many close races -- both parties have run some real losers, and it's difficult to choose who is worse: Candidate A claims he'll work with the President, but he's voted for 6 tax hikes or Candidate B, who also says he supports the President and won't raise taxes, but has a record for starting questionable social programs that end up costing the taxpayers millions.

It's a flying circus without the humor . . .

-- Anonymous, November 05, 2002