"We have to go back to 1974 (during Watergate) to find such a favorable environment,'' Democratic political operative James Carville tells writer Al Hunt. "If we can't win in this environment, we have to question the whole premise of the party.'' It's highly unlikely that the Republicans will retain control of the House of Representatives and hold a commanding advantage in the Senate in January. But what if the Democrats don't replace Denny Hastert with Speaker Pelosi? What if they don't take out Senators Rick Santorum, Conrad Burns, and Mike DeWine? Historical trends certainly favored Democrats in the 2002 off-year elections. The political climate certainly favored them in 2004--George W. Bush was ready to be defeated. But the Democrats whiffed. It's hard to envision a scenario in which the Democrats don't win handily in November, but if they don't James Carville's advice of questioning the premise of the party will need to be heeded--if the Democrats don't wish to remain relegated to second-party status for years to come.

Democrats are pretty good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. What would happen if they couple their anti-iraq war message with a plan for universal service (a draft)? I keep hearing Democrats in various forums bring universal service up as some great idea. Would being drafted into a choice of civil service or the military really resonate with the American public?

Problem for Carville and his ilk is that the Democratic Party’s alleged platforms only resonate with people already committed to the party. They continue to foist on the electorate candidates who are stale or new candidates who recite the mantra of the stale candidates who appeal to their loony base. As I’ve said, as long as they keep nominating low caliber liberal weenies and closet commies, they will not win.

In a microcosm of how the party continues to go, here in the Republic of Massachusetts, the Dems have supported a diverse cast of characters in the primary race for Governor. Their front runner is a slick African American businessman who was a member of the Clinton administration and who, among his many socialist ideas, supports giving driver licenses and social security numbers to illegal aliens. If the Dems get their way, our Republican Lt. Gov. should cake-walk to the corner office.

My bet is that Carville will eventually be questioning the premise of his party.

I hate to say it, but I'm also concerned if the Republicans win they'll be back to business as usual, spending like drunken sailors while ignoring the undeniable signs of disillusionment and dissatisfaction that exist in their conservative base.

The Republicans will hold the House I think. The Dems will pick up seats, but they won't take control. As asdf said, the Dems platforms only resonate with those who are already Dems.

Anger at the GOP will cause some seat loss, yes, but I think it is far more likely that there will just be record low voter turnout than that the people will come out for the Dems.

Way to go Ben-T. : (

That's the Rethuglican strategy in a nutshell: govern poorly and hope people just don't vote.

I agree with Thom, I don't ever think one pary should control the House, the Senate, and the White House. The Clinton/Gingrich era showed that divided government worked to cap government spending.

I was proud to be a Republican then. Now the Rethuglicans are bankrupting our treasury, sending our men and women to die for a useless war, selling the farm to Communist China, outsourcing our jobs to India, and allowing an incontrolled invasion of our borders.

The only way the Republicans will ever get their act together is if they start losing elections and face down the pork guzzlers in thier party.

Democrats in 06', Gingrich in 08'.

If you are a conservative who sympathizes with actual conservative ideas, than why were you attacking us all as racists in the last thread?

Sure HaHa, you're a former proud republican. That's why you make a point of referring to republicans as "rethuglicans".
At least have the balls to admit you're demoliberprogressive.

When the democrats lose again this election cycle you won't hear any calm reflection about the whole premise of their party. A calm discussion among the democrats about what they stand for.
What we will hear from them are two different things.....

1. they didn't lose the election the republicans stole it

2. the rest will not question their policies, just claim they failed to get their message out

Yep, it'll be another case of voter fraud and machine tampering. Scenes (in their minds) of GOP storm troopers herding good Dems away from the polls.

More non-sense rhetoric from Flynn Files’s own troll. Does anyone out there believe this guy has any idea what he believes in, or even what the facts are? Also, I’m still waiting for an answer on what you would do to fight terrorism (name calling and criticizing others isn’t a strategy). We all know who I’m talking about!

AM, as far as I can tell the Democrats/Liberal position on the terrorism fight breaks down like this:

1) There isn't a terrorist threat.
2) There is a terrorist threat.
a) The terrorists hate us because of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, so we must now support the Palestinians over the Israelis.
b) It is a law enforcement problem and we should use legal means to combat it, with great respect to civil rights and civil liberties.
c) We must work with a UN led force to something something.

Opus, I doubt you could name a Democratic policy.

How could you crtitize them?

Well you would be correct in your doubt, as currently the Democratic party does not have any policies on the national level, because they do no hold power.

You sure are good at intellectual dishonesty.

Ok I meant policy proposal Ben-T.

Obviously. It's not dishonesty, its called abbeviation.