A blog called Gin and Tacos seems to have a similar distaste for the insistence of the talking heads on cable news to take limited data on election results and project a grand theme about “what the voters are saying.” His simple explanation – districts where Obama won more than 55% of the votes returned Democrats to the House. Otherwise, not. “[T]urnout fell 18-20% compared to 2008. Some people who showed up just to vote for Obama did not show up again, and some people who voted for him decided to vote Republican this time.”
For those who insist on translating the message being sent, the author suggests the American Voter is demanding the following:
1. Social Security reform that guarantees my current level of benefits, alters someone else’s, and cuts everyone’s Social Security taxes to boot.
2. A world-class national infrastructure that can be built and maintained without tax dollars.
3. A balanced budget that doesn’t sacrifice any of the government programs – especially the sacred military-industrial complex and the various old age benefits – that we like.
4. Clean air without pollution controls, clean water with a neutered and underfunded EPA, and businesses that do socially responsible things without any regulation whatsoever.
. . .
It couldn’t be any clearer: we want a government that will resolve every problem we currently face with solutions that require no effort, no sacrifices, and no money.
That sounds about right. I thought the last collapse might disenthrall us from the notion that we can have something for nothing, but I misoverestimated us.
It is foolish to compare a midyear election to a Presidential one, especially the outlier Obama election.
Compared to Obama, everybody’s turnout was drastically lower, but Democrats were more lower.
But compared to ’06, a very good Democrat year, Democrat turnout was flat, Republican turnout surged.
Unlike that snarky 4 points, the real reason that voters returned to the Republican party is that the Democrats rammed through the stimulus and Obamacare without the consent of the American people. Absent those items, there is a much smaller Republican surge, maybe a small Republican majority in the house.
Agreed on all points. Without health care and the stimulus, I think we’d be looking at a smaller but still significant Dem edge in the House.
The interesting part to me is the Senate. I wonder if some of the better Repub Senate candidates were eliminated in primaries, clearing the way for less-impressive candidates. Ironically, I could easily see us having a Republican senator in Delaware and Nevada if the atmosphere were less “Republican.”
I didnt vote this time.It’s the first time I can remember.. I just didnt care.
I had stood in line almost 3 hours to vote for Obama in 08,and was excited when he won.During the last 2 years I was upset the way Obama never led on anything.My perception was that he put the conservative democrats in charge ( were there 7?).I guess the strategy was so that nothing ‘radical’ would be passed.So how is Obamas 2 years protrayed politically ? … 2 years of radical legislation . Whereas the so-called ‘bitch’ of the House ‘Pelosi’ (no title),was able to push through great leglislation in the House which simply fell to the floor.Looking back I dont think Obama talked to anyone to get things going.There seemed to be no plan to pull everything or anything to together legislately.
I still would have voted except for the political ads..all negative, mostly personal with never any real issues. It seemed liked a completely failed process no matter who got elected.
My personal issue is that my basic income is from a retiree public pension from Illinois ,which is almost broke.Im one of the villains,and because of me and people like me , state coffers all over the country are going broke .The formulated solution is: the less my pension becomes,the better off everyone else will be. So I just didnt vote this time.Maybe in 2012