The Blue Wave Blues

The Democrats started into this election season full of assurance that the midterms would be a wave election and flip control of both houses of Congress. Well, maybe not the Senate, but the House for sure. OK, so the House isn’t in the bag, but we’re way ahead. They also thought that the 2016 election would be a slam dunk.

All the Democrats should have had to do this year was to appear to be reasonable, to not look too crazy, and they haven’t been able to do that. Many voters aren’t thrilled with certain aspects of Donald Trump, but many feel they are better off now than they were two years ago. As Conrad Black points out in a post over at NRO,

[w]hatever the polls or the anti-Trump media say, the country knows that unless the local candidate is a person of outstanding merit, and there are many in the Democratic party, a vote for the Democrats is an affirmation of sociopathic conduct, unlimited illegal immigration, failed public policy, the resumption of a flat-lined economy, and a diffident and ineffectual pacifism in the world, where allies lapse and vacuums are filled by terrorists; and China steps confidently toward the headship of the world’s nations.

We’ll soon know how whether the Democrats’ behavior has nationalized the election in ways that override local issues and local talent, leaving the Republicans in control of Congress. The next week-and-a-half is going to be interesting.

Fasten your seat belts.

4 thoughts on “The Blue Wave Blues

  1. And most of these claims are lies. Sociopathic conduct is far from rare among Republicans, and ‘unlimited illegal immigration’ is a baseless scare tactic. Letting in as few people as possible, be it refugees and immigrants, and then claiming that your opponents who oppose your position as wanting to let in everyone is a lie. There is plenty of room between none and everyone. I wouldn’t argue with a statement that says they would like more, but more than zero isn’t everyone.

    Failed public policy is also difficult to say. Right now there is a republican-controlled senate, house of representatives, and president. Who, exactly, is the democrat who has been doing any federal public policy over the past two years? Seems to me that failures in policy should be blamed on the incumbant party.

    The resumption of a flat-lined economy is also subjective. Yeah, there’s stuff to be concerned about if certain democrats are in charge of the party. But there’s stuff to be concerned about certain republicans. Trade wars and tariffs often backfire, after all.

    “a diffident and ineffectual pacifism in the world, where allies lapse and vacuums are filled by terrorists.”

    This is pretty much a naked lie. Trump’s been happy to embrace non-democratic leaders like Putin, Kim, and Mohammad bin Salman. Allies have been slapped with tariffs, and seem to be skeptical that a reality television leader with a questionable relationship with the truth. In any case, this is a midterm election, not a presidential one.

    Opposing China is something I can support. But I think Trump’s way is the wrong way. He should be looking at Southeast and South Asia, and Africa, to build up public support for America there. Offering alternatives to Chinese cash would do wonders.

  2. There’s also the question of why Democrats have to win the popular vote by about 54-46% in order to win the house.

Leave a Reply