GOP Doom

Here's Ben Schneider's lead from yesterday's Congress Daily:

Although he has abandoned his rallying cry to retake the majority, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Ensign of Nevada is using the specter of an almost filibuster-proof Democratic majority to motivate potential GOP supporters in November.

You know things are bad when your political party won't even pretend it's possible that they'll pick up seats months ahead of an election. Back in January 2007, the congressional Republicans reached the conclusion that lockstep support for the wildly unpopular president and his wildly unpopular war was the right way to respond to the Democrats' big win in 2006. I think some folks are going to be standing around in January 2009 wondering why they thought that was a good idea.

Comments

I don't think the GOP's non-response to 2006's losses is the result of a conscious decision; instead it's a simple inability to make the necessary changes. The GOP is a top-down authoritarian organization, both structurally and ideologically. They can no more repudiate their leader than your fingers and toes can repudiate your brain.

Over the next few elections the Republicans will need to either drop a lot of their ideological baggage or wither to irrelevance. I'm hoping they do the latter.

Posted by jimBOB | April 18, 2008 10:26 AM

When you've pinned your political hopes on a slow-motion train wreck, the only sure path to utter defeat is to then flip-flop and say you seriously fucked up. (Sorry guys! Our bad!) By marching in lockstep they could at least hold out some hope that things would somehow "turn around" in Iraq, and they'd get to look smart. And of course, it's always possibly to delay the final outcome in Iraq and leave the Democrats to deal with it, i.e. our current policy.

Posted by Bill | April 18, 2008 10:43 AM

The GOP is Bush's party. Admitting fault and changing directions aren't his forte.

Some Republicans managed to hold onto their seats in 2006. We'll see how many of them lose them in 2008.

Posted by phil | April 18, 2008 10:48 AM

I hope the first thing the Democrats do is strip Lieberman of all of his committee assignments.

Posted by Joe Strummer | April 18, 2008 11:00 AM

No, they'll congratulate themselves on having avoided the more extensive losses they believe would result from breaking ranks.

Posted by aleks | April 18, 2008 11:24 AM

"When you've pinned your political hopes on a slow-motion train wreck, the only sure path to utter defeat is to then flip-flop and say you seriously fucked up."

That's true of the Bush Administration, but individual Congress critters have ALWAYS bailed out in the past on policies and Presidencies that were going South.

Mike

Posted by MBunge | April 18, 2008 11:47 AM

When more than 50% of republican incumbents lose, then you'll see them change strategery. Right now they are still much more likely to be defeated from a primary challenge than from a general election opponent. Anyway, if you lose, or more likely just don't feel up for it anymore and you retire, you can just get a cushy wingnut welfare (or a lobbyist) job--as long as you don't become a heritic.

Until the members of the party care more about others than themselves, they will never change--and never regret it. Since selfishness is the raison d'etre of the gop, it'll never happen.

Posted by Client #11 | April 18, 2008 11:47 AM

Congress is an irrelevancy now. It's a nice gig for the inhabitants but they are just a sideshow. Everything is dependent upon making McCain, or as a fall back Hillary president. For all we know Obama might just play ball with the financial and corporate establishment but that question mark is unacceptable. A president McCain can ignore congress unless they really go crazy and start cutting off money to things he wants. Then he will just tell Paulson, who will still be at Treasury or some other Wall Street guy will,to cut the checks without congressional approval.

Who is going to stop them?

Posted by rapier | April 18, 2008 11:48 AM

No, they'll congratulate themselves on having avoided the more extensive losses they believe would result from breaking ranks.

I think they're probably correct - hang together or hang separately and whatnot. The GOP turned on Nixon in '74 and were promptly thrown out of office the next time the voters had their say.

Sucks for the GOP legislators that Bush is as bad as he is but I don't think they actually have much of a choice - especially when his approval ratings among GOP voters is still in the 70% range.

Posted by BFR | April 18, 2008 11:48 AM

This makes it all the more necessary to tie "The Maverick" to the GOP's slow-motion train wreck. Once Hillary ends her campaign, the Democratic Party and progressives will have their work cut out for them convincing McCain's adoring press to print the truth about this fraud of a candidate. The outcome of November's election depends on it, because McCain is actually a terrible candidate, if only the public were informed of how McSame is he to Bush, and how tainted he is by decades of selfish and corrupt decision making.

Posted by Fox | April 18, 2008 12:02 PM

Is the GOP and Bush responsible for the 300,000 kids who the Rand report states now have depression and Traumatic Brain injuries? I say yes. If you do the math (and I think I did this correctly as I am not a math major) on kids filing for disability it goes like this:

300,000 kids on disability
$1,000 per month AVERAGE payment from VA
60 years of payments till the kids are 80 or so
720 months in 60 years
720 x $1,000 x 300,000 = $216,000,000,000 That's TRILLION dollars...and that is not even adjusting for inflation!!

Our grandchildren's great grandchildren will still be paying for Bush's and the GOP led war against a county that never did anything to us.

Time for a change! A HUGE change!

Posted by Jon | April 18, 2008 12:16 PM

I agree with BFR. As bad as things look for the Republicans compared to their current status or to the Democratic Party, the valid comparison is to how things would look if they didn't do what they're doing. Partisanship, demagoguery and incumbency aren't enough to completely make up for how badly Republicans have screwed things up, but as far as individual Republicans go rather than the party as a whole, better to keep those advantages rather than throw them away.

Posted by Cyrus | April 18, 2008 1:29 PM

Jon, get out your calculator. Or count your zeros. That's $216 billion, not trillion. Still, not chump change, for sure.

Posted by RichardB | April 18, 2008 2:45 PM

Jon, get out your calculator. Or count your zeros. That's $216 billion, not trillion. Still, not chump change, for sure.

Posted by RichardB | April 18, 2008 2:46 PM

Yes, RichardB...you are right...it's billion and NOT trillion...sorry about that...but, if you figure this amount over 60 years it may well be in the trillions...I'll be long gone by the time the last "Bush's War" veteran has passed. It's so sad there are people who actually think this president is a hero...now even the PM of Britain! What's next? I fear that Bush and Cheney will concoct some sort of distraction prior to the General Election to somehow gain popularity again. So sad...stupid men in powerful positions!

Posted by Jon | April 18, 2008 3:21 PM

Matthew, all I can say is hush up and stop giving them hints. The longer they stick to their dumb strategy the farther they'll fall, and good riddance.

Posted by DCBob | April 18, 2008 5:19 PM

Re: 300,000 kids on disability

They are not "kids" (they are adults, in every sense of the word) and only a fraction will end up on disability. You can certainly work with many forms of depression, and the disease is treatable these days. "Traumatic brain injury" takes in a lot of territory and the milder forms won't cause moret han transient impairment. I had a mild concussion back in my accident-prone youth. I had a huge headache (and lingering headaches for weeks) and I would not recommend the experience, but it didn't affect my employability or earnings potential in the least.

Posted by JonF | April 18, 2008 6:38 PM

JonF...Well, at my age, they are still "kids" and you obviously have never been in the military or visited a Veteran's Hospital to understand the horrors of what Bush's and the GOP's war has done to permanently damage these "kids" forever.

Posted by Jon | April 18, 2008 7:10 PM

JonF...Well, at my age, they are still "kids" and you obviously have never been in the military

I am in the military and my fellow servicemembers and I aren't children. We'd prefer not to be insulted by being called "kids".

Posted by guineapigfury | April 20, 2008 8:48 PM