commentary by Wayne Allyn Root

[NCAces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

But, the main four reasons are clear:

1. Historically, the President's party in power in the 6th year of an 8 year president's term gets their ass handed to them. The losses that the Republicans suffered are well within (and even under) the historical losses in similar situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

This probably belongs in Politics>, but you can't minimize the thumpin' put on here by saying that it always happens historically. It hasn't happened at all in recent history (i.e., not to Clinton, and not to Reagan, and I'm not sure what happened under Nixon is generalizable, obviously).

Also -- not a single Dem incumbent lost. Not one. I don't think any governors lost either, much less Senators or Reps. Has that ever happened? Ever?

Gloating aside, I'm afraid I have to agree with #2 through #4, though. But I think that in general the Repubs are doomed unless they can figure out how to hold onto social conservatives and fiscal conservatives/social liberals at the same time, and their attitude about stuff like the UIGEA is a symptom of things to come. Good luck with that [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].

[/ QUOTE ]

I take no comfort in number 1, but it can't be ignored either. The only exception to the "6 year itch" since FDR has been Clinton (and the amazing dot.com economy could have had to do with that ... 1998 and all). Even Reagan lost 6 Senators and control of the Senate. And his ratings were pretty good at that point, especially when compared to Bush42. To me, that is not the type of history you can ignore ... it is far too consistent to be an aberration. That said, we agree that 2-4 clearly were the reasons.