Stu Rothenberg says there are no real prospects for a Democratic wave election with Democrats gaining control of the House:
After looking at all of the individual district polls, those made public as well as dozens that have not been released for public consumption, and talking with both Democratic and Republican insiders whose main interest is understanding exactly what is happening rather than regurgitating the party line, I see little evidence that Democrats are close to gaining the 25 seats they need to win control of the House.
True, some polling is contradictory, and I would not rule out the possibility that there could be a shift in public opinion between now and Nov. 6. But there is no evidence of a wave at the House level.
I continue to believe that the presidential election will be very close. Assume, just for the sake of argument, that the president is re-elected. What happens then?
If the Republicans hold the House, as seems likely, and the Democrats hold the Senate, as also seems likely, I strongly suspect that the passive aggressive stalemate of the last two years will continue. The president has shown little interest or skill in pursuing mutually agreeable compromise with the opposing party. I strongly suspect that he doesn’t believe he should need to.
The Republicans have, if anything, been more hostile to him than he to them. I think that predictions (including those by the president himself) that the House Republicans, chastened by a second defeat in securing the White House, will come to the table ready to give the president more of what he wants are far-fetched to say the least.
Quite to the contrary, I think they’ll be loaded for bear. Each of them will have won his or her own re-election, affirming that what they’ve been doing has been working. Whatever mandate the president has, each House Republican will have a mandate of his or her own.
I strongly suspect that the passive aggressive stalemate of the last two years will continue.
I don’t think so. If that stalemate continues they we’ll go right over a cliff on December 31, 2012. That will push some kind of change on the actors in question. I have no idea what that change will be, but something will have to give.
That’s what everybody playing Chicken thinks, anyway. Right up to the crash.
I don’t think I was clear. I think the stalemate will happen if the election goes as posited, and I think we will go off the cliff. I think that once we go over the cliff THEN something will have to give once the effects start to have telling effect. I don’t think anyone will bend before that.
The time for the Republicans to get the outcome they’d view as most favorable is right this second. They have more leverage to use against the president and, possibly, the Democratic Senate. After the election the downside risk for inaction will be practically nonexistent for anybody.
The bond market will speak up eventually. Until then, expect posturing.
Steve
More than 70% of all Treasuries are presently in effect being bought by the Federal Reserve, heading for 100. At what point is the bond market irrelevant?
In that scenario (President reelected, Dem Senate, GoP House) I envision a lot of can-kicking.
Democratic hops to regain Congress hinge a lot on California, Illinois, and New York, I believe I’ve heard that Illinois needs to provide at least five new seats. It looks like it might be two, based upon a Democratically drawn map that seemed to fall apart in downstate. And one can’t dispense with the notion that in Illinois, the rift between state Democrats and the unions may create unforeseen outcomes.
The Surprise Party is the one with the hops. Their mascot was the kangaroo, after all.
Well, I am a hophead, but not so much into kangaroos.
I like the surprise party, but Kangaroos are mean little sh!ts.