The great Mark Tapscott has been chewing over the arguments on conservatives, GOP, and control of Congress, and offers more thoughts today. 

He asks the important question of “what if” – specifically, what-if the Democrats win back one or both houses of Congress. The worst case scenario, he posits, would be a veto-proof Democratic majority that would ensure that “the War in Iraq would be lost, the Bush administration's successes in the War on Terror would be reversed, there would be disastrous tax and spending policies enacted and few if any conservative judicial nominees would be confirmed”.  

Tapscott doubts this possibility will come to pass, pointing out the GOP’s advantage in Sun Belt demographics and that back in 1994, the GOP didn’t win a veto-proof majority. On paper, he’s right. However, I would point out that the president is not merely threatened by a veto-proof Democratic majority; he’s threatened by a veto-proof Democrat-and-RINO majority. Remember, after a bad year, the Senate Republican Caucus would have a lot less Santorums and Talents and the same number of Specters and Snowes. Put together the not-very-conservative Republicans with the Democratic majority, and you would have a sizable legislative majority, maybe veto-proof, maybe not. 

(No matter where you’re sitting in the world right now, if you listen carefully, you can hear a distant voice yelling, “The Judges! Remember the Supreme Court Justices!!!” This is Hugh Hewitt, screaming himself hoarse in California.) 

Beyond that, Mark offers an argument that has some merit – that a Democratic win would allow the public to see what a Speaker Pelosi and/or Majority Leader Reid would have to offer the country. “There would be lots of talk about insanities like impeachment, congressional investigations, repealing the Bush tax cuts and the like. But the lack of actual results would drive the Moonbats into venegeful desperation and a general revulsion among independent and conservative voters, with a bloody and perhaps permanently crippling splintering of the Democrats to follow.” I can see that happening. It really seems to be a likely scenario.

But I’ve also been thinking lately about how life rarely seems to go according to plan. 

Screenwriter William Goldman wrote, “Nobody knows anything.” He was referring to it in the context of Hollywood, contending that no matter how smart or successful a film director, producer, or studio head became, they never really knew that a movie would be a hit. Sometimes the biggest stars and most successful directors turn out a flop. Sometimes a movie gets rave reviews, but audiences don’t like it. And there always seems to be some little-known low-budget movie that comes out of nowhere to be a surprise hit. 

I think the “nobody knows anything” mantra is comparable to the world of politics. We can strongly suspect that voters would be repulsed by Speaker Pelosi and a Kos-style legislative agenda. But we don’t know for certain. Remember that a Democrat-controlled Congress is also likely to be getting astonishingly glowing press coverage. You know that roaring economy? You’ll start hearing about it, and it will all be credited to the Pelosi-Reid Economic Stimulus Bill passed in January 2007. Congressional hearings accusing oil companies of “illegal profits” will be welcomed by consumers frustrated by high gas prices. Bush’s approval rating will take another hit after he vetoes the “Every Voter Gets Free Health Care And Free Prescription Drugs And Rent Or Mortgage Subsidies And A Pony Too Act of 2007.” Senator John Kerry’s summit meeting with French President Jacques Chirac will be credited with dramatically reducing anti-Americanism around the world. And so on. 

Maybe the public will strongly oppose the Democratic agenda after two years. But then again, maybe they’ll like it, or find parts of it they do like, or maybe they’ll just get used to them. The “let’s lose this year” strategy hands a bunch of Democrats the handy tool of incumbency to keep those seats. And in the Senate races, the candidates get to keep their seats until 2012.

 

Mark calls a two-year performance of a Democratic congressional majority “the perfect setup for a strengthened conservative majority to return in Congress in 2008, most likely with a White House occupant wise enough to recognize that the ‘emerging Republican (i.e conservative) majority’ had become a reality.”

 

Maybe. Or, you know, Republicans could skip the losing part and try the crazy idea of winning this year.