No…not me…I’m not writing a post-mortem. Instead, I’ll link you to the best (and most critically honest) one that I’ve read.
Annika thinks there’s a lot of blame to go around, but the single biggest reason the Republicans were thumped on Tuesday was President Bush:
No one loves and supports this President more than I do. But after yesterday’s debacle I have to say it: I blame Bush.
It was a debacle, and don’t let anybody tell you different. The voters threw forty Republicans out of office, and they would have thrown Bush out too, if they’d only had the chance. Not a single Democratic incumbent lost, and the carnage would have been much worse if it had not been for Gerrymandering.
I agree. For starters, if President Bush would have asked Rumsfeld to resign back in August, we might have saved one or two Senate seats, and maybe a handful of close House races.
But the fact remains, George W. Bush was handed a vote of confidence by the American people in 2004, and he did not get the job done. Not only that, he took our patience for granted.
The patience of a Democratic people is a historically fickle thing. It would be nice if it weren’t so fickle, but it is. And that’s part of the ground that President Bush had to fight on. You can’t excuse it by saying, as we’ve heard for three years now, “It’s hard work. Stay the course. Stay the course.” Americans demand results. We’re willing to sacrifice; we’re willing to be patient; we’re willing to trust our leaders. But ultimately, we demand results.
Annika also has a pretty damned good definition of what would consitute a victory in Iraq (something neither the Republicans or the Dems have been able to articulate:
Victory in Iraq — let’s just call it “success” at this point — should be defined like this: any situation in Iraq that would enable us to bring our troops home without everything we’ve done in the last three and a half years falling to pieces once we leave. I’m not sure that the Democrats have any idea how to accomplish this, but I also know that the President sure as shit hasn’t gotten us there yet.
I agree. Furthermore, I think that’s exemplified by the many new blue dog democrats who were recently elected. The democrat party was smart enough to know that we the people were not happy with Bush and so they monopolized on it and appointed people to run against the republicans who were almost indistinguishable from their republican counterparts at the house and senate level. Pretty smart I’d say. Now, let’s see if these new blue dogs live up to their campaign promises and if the far left leadership lets them do it.
Npw that is the most honest and forthright appraissal of an election loss by a member of the losing team I have ever read, from either side. Very commendable.
Dianne-there will always be distinct differences between Republicans and Democrats, as well there should be. But the Democrats who won these elections you can be sure will stick to their positions. For the simple fact, they will want to be re-elected.