Despite the exit polling, I think the moment when the GOP lost the majority of the electorate was Katrina, at least on an emotional level. Most of those who believe in limited government place limits on it -- no one but the hard core libertarians actually think that the highway system should be privatized. The electorate saw a botched response to a huge problem -- one well within what most people consider federal jurisdiction.

Ideology is an underlying basis for decision making, not an end in itself. Most people neither want radical leftism nor hard-core conservatism -- they want solutions to their problems. Once both parties figure this out, the country will be well on its way to being back on track. I think the Democrats are a bit ahead right now, but I believe in strong opposition parties. Lopsided government is bad for everyone.

Grabbing and holding on to power(and money) at the expense of anyone not part of their "club" has been the republicans' MO since before the inception of the K-Street project. Wedge issues, telephone smear campaigns, voter harassment and intimidation, etc.

Here is some more depressing proof.

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/15966909.htm

Wow. Absolutely pathetic. Go ahead and tell me that the Dems do this kind of stuff too, and then post proof. Preferably not the old corrupt Chicago/Illinois Democrats story.

The battle for leadership of the new minority party in Congress reflects the soul-searching going on...

Tactics in politics can move you a few seats. 2002 was a tactical election that worked well for the GOP. But to take back the senate and house in 2008, you need to take a strategic position that will resonate with the base and the middle.

Both parties have opportunities to do this. I don't think the democrats have done this in 2006 and I know the republicans have lost their way on the strategy front. For the republicans, they need to be able to look voters in the eye and be able to answer honestly and effectively two tough questions.

"What would be different if the republicans were back in the majority?"

"Why didn't the republicans do that when they were in the majority?"

Give contract with America like answers to the first question and show why it would be different next time and the republicans can sweep the boards in 2008. Fail to give a good enough answer to either question and you are back to incremental gains based on political tactics with all the power of the incumbency blocking you.

Just don't ask me to bet money on it.

Thank you for sharing this story with me !

Indeed, the whuppin' constituted six percent of the Senate and about the same in the House.

Excellent summation, James. A very well written article. Thank you.

The voters threw the bums out

Would that that had happened! But it didn't: nearly all incumbents were re-elected. A mere handful (and those had mostly been crippled by scandal, gaffes, stridency, or all three) of incumbents were replaced. Even that wouldn't have happened but for a general unease caused by Iraq, less money left in the pocket at the end of the week, and a relentless advertising campaign.

Here in Illinois in particular it was an all-incumbent election. How else to explain electing Todd Stroger Cook County Board President (he's the son of the prior president)? Nearly everyone agrees he's an amiable dunce.