Saturday, May 29, 2010

Early June Update on 2010 Elections

First of all, I don't see the Democrats dropping below 50 seats (I think we'll win Cali and Washington). So at least it will be split with the Vice President breaking any ties. In fact, though, Democrats could go as high as 52 (Pennsylvania, which I am doubtful about but the Times shows leaning Democrat, and Connecticut which might get better after it gets worse for the Democratic front runner who misled voters about his military history). Illinois doesn't look good right now and neither does Arkansas.

The house is a bit harder to tell, but seems safe to remain with the Democrats. In order to lose the House, Dems would have to win less than 54 of the 64 seats that the Times says are leaning Democrat and all of the toss-ups.

Of course, there is a lot of time.

I also want to say I don't know if I would mind a switch of power in one or both houses. It might lead to some decent compromises and might actually bring out (or force) Obama's bipartisan spirit. Then again, that wasn't the case in Albany, so maybe it is hopeless. I don't have a good frame of reference since I was a little young during Clinton's presidency. After 1994 he worked with Congress on Welfare Reform, but Newt Gingrich and the Republicans were really divisive. I should also consider that a Republican Congress, or even one house, would make it much harder for Obama to fund some of the necessary social programs like housing vouchers.

So maybe I would mind. I don't know. All I know is that I am really tired of the ridiculous rhetoric. More on that later.

No comments: