One thing that could change this year is that if it looks as if President Obama is going

[WCGreen]

to win, voter just might look down the ticket and say, you know I wonder how good the president would do if he has a good, solid majority in the House and the Senate to work with.

This is why I have been calling this a potential realigning election. It's a very simple occurrence that happens once every twenty years or so. the last big realigning election was 1980 with Reagan and culminated with the GOP taking the House for the first time in decades.

I can almost assure you that far too many of the tea party and the newbies to politics that came in in 2010, didn't pay enough attention to constituent services which is something that assures victory and a long career in DC.

You help one voter and they tell another ten people and pretty soon everyone has a story about their Congressperson. That's how DK was able to win in a conservative district year and year. They had to redraw his district so radically that he was left with most of his loyal voters in another district.

So anyway, if this flows from the Oval Office to the House and Senate, we could be developing a real good base for the future.

And when you think about it, who of the GOP is going to be able to run and beat a democrat, especially if Hillary runs in 2016.

I know I have written posts about this a couple of times now, but this is just even more pertinent now with the huge demographic changes that are coming at us over the next few years...

[left on green only]

1. I hope your right, except this time.....

....I hope that President Obama realizes that it is time to get something done, with or without partisan politics. We definitely need to see some big changes in the way things are done, to turn our troubles around. If the right wing doesn't want to work with us, then run their asses down.

[secondwind]

2. He will.. The second term is always different. Fuck the GOP

[CrispyQ]

7. If he doesn't the repubs will be back in power in 2016. -nt

[Drunken Irishman]

3. It also could keep Republican voters home...

If they think Romney is going to lose, they just might not be motivated to go to the polls. They're already unenthusiastic about him, add the potential of a loss, which is looking more and more likely the closer we get to the election, and Republicans could just say, "fuck it" and stay home.

This isn't like '08 where many held their nose and voted because of Palin. Ryan might be their guy, but there is no evidence he engaged their supporters at the level Palin did. Remember, Palin was drawing crowds that rivaled Obama in '08 (including 60,000 in Florida). Ryan's crowds are pathetic in comparison.

It's entirely possible these voters just don't vote in November ... especially the evangelicals.

Just hating Obama might not be enough.

[CrispyQ]

8. I was stunned when, many years ago, I read that there are voters who want to vote for the winner.

They pay attention to the polls close to the election & cast a vote for who they think will win. I didn't believe it, then I actually met someone like that.

[Drunken Irishman]

11. The 'bandwagon effect'...

Yup. It's real! Crazy, right?

Here's something on it:

During the 1992 U.S. presidential election, Vicki G. Morwitz and Carol Pluzinski conducted a study, which was published in The Journal of Consumer Research. At a large northeastern university, some of 214 volunteer business students were given the results of student and national polls indicating that Bill Clinton was in the lead. Others were not exposed to the results of the polls. Several students who had intended to vote for Bush changed their minds after seeing the poll results (Morwitz and Pluzinski 58-64).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_effect

[peace frog]

4. I agree a realignment is possible, however

your statement: "who of the GOP is going to be able to run and beat a democrat, especially if Hillary runs in 2016" is a bit cocky. The Republican party is in serious disarray now, but within the next few years it could select a candidate for POTUS who has potentially broad appeal. They do exist, you know, but have kept a lower profile of late for obvious reasons. Jeb Bush is one who may fill the GOP void, much as I loathe the thought of yet another Bush in the WH. If Hillary is the Dem candidate for POTUS, it's possible the GOP would offer a credible female candidate in Susana Martinez, gov of New Mexico, for POTUS or Veep. It's not all roses simply because the Dems hold the Senate (likely) or re-take the House (unlikely). Eternal vigilance.

[WCGreen]

12. This is precipitated by the changes in demographics...

The people who are just coming into the voting pool are going to be more liberal, more accustomed to needing and recognizing the roll of government in their lives.

I can't see a majority of this demo voting for a republican at least until they completely change their message and develop candidates who reflect a change in tone and delivery by the GOP.

Perhaps deep into the 20's...

[Mopar151]

5. It's gonna be an ugly time to be a Republican

In NH, 7 moderate Republicans have been "primaried" in favor of far-righties - most for the "sin" of voting against gay marrige repeal. And it was done with out-of-state PAC money. From the looks, any Repub running for statewide office has scrubbed their campaign material of GOP references or ID - even lobbyist "Odius" Lamontagne, whose (Governor)message is straight-up neocon.

There are some Romney signs here - but they are mostly on the way to Mitt's house!

[CrispyQ]

9. My husband is unaffiliated so he gets political flyers from both sides.

He's gotten three flyers from repubs with no mention of the repub party on the flyer. You have to visit their website to find their party affiliation. ~lol.

[Selatius]

6. We need a majority, but we could use a liberal majority.

There really can't be much done if half the caucus in Senate is comprised of right-wing or center-right Democrats.

This is why the Public Option had to be deleted. They didn't have enough votes from folks like Baucus and Nelson and others to defeat a Republican filibuster. The only way to get past that was to junk the whole idea entirely and go just the insurance mandate, basically. Then they were willing to release their votes to pass the ACA.

[kentuck]

10. I think you may be right.

It would be the only time in over 60 years that the House had changed hands with a change in the Presidency, to the same Party.

[SoCalDem]

13. Unless Harry Reid changes the filibuster "rule", nothing will change

THAT one thing is what's standing between success and failure