Looks like those Whigs managed to pull of a Lazarus last night, eh? The key word the morning after is whither, not wither.
   Another notion that seems to have gotten revived from 1994 is this gem: "after two years of those guys, the voters will be happy to have us back." Well, maybe, but Robert Novak has already noted that that didn't work 12 years ago, so the chances it will by 2008 are pretty dicey. A quick glance at Redstate, though, doesn't show that Bob's wisdom has been noticed, despite all the calls to "get back to real conservativism." Umn, guys, Novak's been there, done that-- maybe you should take a listen.
    For everyone who laughed when Democrats thought the way to handle defeat was to move to the left, take heart that the Republican blogs are quite content to mirror that folly. Check in on my pal Hugh, where the advice is mixed, to say the least. Despite eschewing the circular firing squad, a whole lot of what Barnett says contradicts site owner Hewitt's earlier calls to ditch Frist and McCain*. The calls for bipartisanship also ring more than a little hollow, seeing as a suggestion a little later calls for putting Santorum on the Supreme Court. (Left hand, meet right hand.) Hewitt also rejoiced earlier, "now we get to play offense", as if somehow the attacks on "liberals" from conservatives had somehow been tame in the last two years-- or ever. Right now the words, "we earned it" come easily, but what they're in the head and not the heart. On the plus side, the early calls are for Allen not to fight too hard, and at least one voice declining to blame the media. We'll see how long that lasts, especially if Allen looks as if he might pull out a recount.
    As a more contentious assertion, the dream that modern politics is won by positive messages in spite of the negative attacks should be seriously weakened, but I doubt that optimism will fade away easily. (To paraphrase Patton, you don't win by taking a stand for something for your party, you win by making the other son of a bitch take a stand for his party.) Conservatives are lamenting that Democrats won despite hiding their agenda-- I'd say they won because they did, and Republicans would be wise to learn this. I expect the lesson to sail cleanly over Hugh's head and not ruffle a hair . . .
    On the other side, liberals are going to have to let go of impeachment dreams. Taking down a lame-duck, especially an unpopular one (Reagan was different, and besides, he'd clearly fucked up.) Investigations will have to suffice, and Dems will have to let History bring the hammer down on Shrub.
   I also agree with Bruce Reed that the way forward is to reject Rovism, not embrace it. The path to victory in 2008 will not be mobilizing and energizing interest groups that will be easily mocked by an opposition quite willing to do so (unlike John Kerry, say.) Rovism works with a weak opposition and a benign neglect from the media: Democrats can count on neither. Especially if (if!) Hillary Clinton is the presidential nominee.
   Gotta leave it at this, so far. W is speaking, and the spin promises to be thick.

   *The urge to blame McCain for this loss should be a good indicator why he faces such an uphill battle in the primaries. Iraq, Abramoff and Foley lost you this election, and the first instinct is to blame John? "Loathe" doesn't quite seem strong enough to describe the antipathy.

Ex ignorantia ad sapientiam; e luce ad tenebras

... can politick.  With the Democrats in charge in the House and either a slim lead or deadlock in the Senate and the Executive still held by the Republicans, the time is ripe for some politicking.  That would be politicking in the best sense of the word -- meaning that instead of bullying (Republicans 2001 to present) and wimpering (Democrats 2001 to present), they'll actually have to sit down and figure out a way of finding a middle road in all these issues they've been stuck way over in their respective lanes about.

The Democrats have enough oomph now to push legislation through Congress -- they don't have enough to override a veto.  I'm looking for more of a collaborative process in Congress on a wide variety of issues: budget restraint, voting reform, economic policy, education, etc. and a lot less contentiousness and bitterness over the social agenda (abortion and faith-based nonsense) which has fouled the political waters over the past six years.  I'm looking for the Democrats to lead the way towards a budget approach which says, if you don't identify the source of the funds for something, you don't mandate it.  I'm also looking for the Republican Party to quietly turn away from the evangelical Christian agendas.  Because, unless both parties sober up and realize the game will be up if we keep bleeding dollars out the national wazoo, the Chinese and the Indians will end up not just eating our lunch but our breakfast, dinner, and midnight snack also.

Lastly, one of the key issues in this election was Iraq.  The American public just shouted in a clear voice that something has to give.  That something had better be a clear and convincing exit strategy out of the country by 2008 or there will be hell to pay for anyone voting to extend our stay or running around accusing those who want to bring it to an end with being in bed with terrorists.  The problem for both the Democrats and the Republicans is that the two front runners for nomination from either party, Clinton and McCain, have thus far said they agree with the war in Iraq and haven't really stepped back from their positions.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

in positions of power in Kanzas my entire life. I never thought I'd see the day.

I am a little disappointed Joe Lieberman managed to stay on. Oh, well -- A victory for Independents! </irony>.

----- The earth may fail, but we will quiver

Hurrah!

Really, I'd like to be happier about this.  I am happy the Democrats have gained some ground, that Rumsfield has resigned, that W took one in the teeth.

But the American voter is still a homophobic idiot.  It took how many years of Iraq before they finally got fed up?  When it was obvious from the start it was bullshit?  Pathetic.  And banning gay marriage is so spiteful.  It's disgusting.

Great, things are a little better.  I'm glad it's changed.  My daughter found another kid to play with at the polling place and amused herself while I read through the four page ballot.  (Dear city of Seattle, change the rules so we don't have to have an initiative to change move some responsibilites from a closed office to the city clerk's office, and so your planning committee can meet in other than it's usual location during and emergency.)

...Dwayne was hoping that he would pay exactly the right amount of attention to Francine's clitoris.

If the Senate is split evenly, what are the odds that Lieberman will switch to Republican for getting the chair of a committee?  I'm giving it better than even odds.  Maybe I'm too cynical.  For now, I just hope that the Democrats can pull out Montana and Virginia.  With the Senate rules regarding bringing legislation, even if the Democrats control the House, not much will go through as long as the Republicans control what legislation ever makes it to the floor.

Thalia

I feel strangely optimistic.

Almost giddy.

"Peculiar travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God."

The only question I have is after all the mistakes that the republicans have made why was it so close?  

Kind of a total side-tangent here, but it seems to me that with Dems holding at least 1/2 the Senate, and most of the House, this could be a good opportunity for Obama to make some moves between now and the '08 election.
Given that one of his biggest weaknesses is that he hasn't done much yet (except for the Obama/Coburn Federal Funding and Accountability Act), what do y'all think about the possibility that this might be just what he needs to kick his presidential campaign into high gear?

Now with caps!

It was the economic populists and social moderates with a tinge of hawkishness that drove the Democratic party to victory. Now we get to hear all the crappy spin about how the liberal leadership in the House is going to have conflicts with the new conservative Dems, that isn't quite right, we have economic populists who would be happy to pass a new minimum wage law, did you all see how the minimum wage ballot questions all passed, some in overwhelming fashion? I can see the Democratic party looking to do some serious healthcare reform if they can avoid the insurance company backlash, I can see the Democratic party doing plenty on bad trade deals. If the Democratic party can avoid the nonsense social issues they can do very well in the populist midwest, the liberal northeast and the libertarian west, the south is dead, the Dems solidified the Northeast and that will counter the South.

If the Democratic party is smart they keep nominating candidates like John Tester in Montana, Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and Jim Webb in Virginia. And yes, I know Webb hasn't won just yet, but his declaration of victory was a good bold move, and he is winning, and for those that have missed the news Tester has been declared the winner.

Obama needs to do some Hong-Kong-Kung-Fu-High-Wire-Super-Action stunts (and be his own stuntman) during the next two years.

I hope he does, and does well. The USA needs him, and not just for his good looks, either. We need a man of demonstrable substance

----- The earth may fail, but we will quiver

It was a thoroughly enjoyable election night, especially here on TnT chat.

The big disappointment for me was the Daily Show/Colbert Report election night coverage.  After Katherine Harris' breasts deflated and Rick Santorum was taken up by the Rapture, it was all downhill.  

Not to mention 3 hours late - live my arse.

Did I just hear correctly? The Dems did indeed win the Senate?