The Real Question: How Will The Katrina Effect Affect the Republicans in the Next Election?

[sabrelady]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 10:44am

I realize there is still some time b4 the next election, but how short will the memories of the folks in Dixieland have to be to re-elect the Republicans? Could this be the precipitating event to sweep out the White House? Seriously. How much can the party really spin to fix this??

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 10:54am

I think the more interesting question for right now is how is Katrina, the increasingly unpopular war in Iraq, astronomical gas prices etc.... will impact midterm elections next year. There's been a clear failure of leadership from the top down and there's more and more evidence that crucial Republican swing voters are becoming more and more disenchanted with this administration every day.

I believe that this dissatisfaction is going to manifest itself next year in a shift in seats in the House and Senate. Not sure, at this early point whether the Democrats will be able to adequately tap that vein of disillusionment to the tune of the seven (?) seats needed for a majority in the Senate, but I would bet we will see several Republican seats go Democratic in 2006.

Updated On: 9/5/05 at 10:54 AM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 11:45am

i think with the midterms still over a year away that it's way too soon to tell, especially with relief efforts ongoing. the challenge for the democrats as always is what kind of face they manage to put on their candidates. if they manage to put out candidates who can look mainstream and who have actual ideas rather than expectingg to just tap into voter dissatisfaction, they'll do well. if on the other hand they try to run on "bush sucks," regardless of how popular the notion is around here, they'll lose more seats.

one should also note that the elected officials in the immediate areas in nola are all democrats. while most folks around here are content to lay blame for any and all catastrophes in the world at the door of the white house (not that it does not shoulder some responsibility), remember, politics are local and i would not want to be in their seats. if it's one thing the gop can do it's focus people's attention where they want it to be and define races in terms advantageous to them.

in short, (hah!)i don't think that any judgement can be made about the effects until at least february or march when we see what condition the country is in at that point (i know, i know, in tattered ruins barely able to even function).

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 11:51am

"(not that it does not shoulder some responsibility)"

I would say ultimate responsibility, but I suppose "some" is as close as we're going to get.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:05pm

I agree with Margo that there will be a shift in the Senate and definitely in the House.

It is a basic function of the Federal Government when in time of disaster, and local governments do not have the manpower or resources, to respond and bring people and resources to a disaster area. Here, the current Administration on Tuesday failed to recognize the crisis and then act accordingly. This will be Bush's legacy - the needless of thousands of people in New Orleans that could have been saved by prompt action.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:09pm

really, namo? ultimate responsibility for "any and all catastrophes in the world"?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:11pm

As I am sure you know, I was referring to the deadly lack of response to the natural disaster that hit "the homeland" this week.

Updated On: 9/5/05 at 12:11 PM

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:16pm

The Republicans rode into office on Clinton's Penis and the fact the he lied about sex. They rode into office on the theory of small government and bringing back moral authority to government. There will be consequences. Just have a picture of Bush strumming that damn guitar as the levees broke with the caption "Here is how the Republican Party cares about the average American during a crisis... here is how they lead". A year from now people will still be reubuilding. I cannot see how this will not be material to the mid-terms.

Some people may not like it, but had this gone well, Bush would be on some damn levee with a sign saying "Mission Accomplished." You reap what you sow.


Updated On: 9/5/05 at 12:16 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:18pm

yeah, but sometimes i can't help myself.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:18pm

Given the timing of these sorts of things, I think that the hearings and investigation of the response of FEMA and the rest of the government to the Katrina catastrophe will probably not take place until sometime after the first of the year (at the earliest) when midterm elections are heating up, with the final report (likely condemning the Federal response) coming out perhaps next summer. Whether anyone cares about it at that point or whether there'll be a political fallout from it, we'll see.

Updated On: 9/5/05 at 12:18 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:28pm

The thing is, I kind of hate all the strategizing, as if politics is a football game. I hate football just as I hate the sort of detached analysis of how people get themselves elected, how they get control and power without any inclusion of the impact on human life. These incompetent and greedy people may be "good" at getting into office (with Rovian tactics like "Did you hear McCain fathered a n* baby?" and the like) but what they have demonstrated time and again is that they are not good people.

What we are seeing is the politics of incompetence and greed writ large. And it has an impact on real living (or once-living) human beings.
Give me one Al Gore arranging a jet to get medical attention to people who need it while refusing to talk to the press, over any number of these Bush cronies who are crowing over the "fantastic" job they've done while all the time taking care to point out that "now is not the time" to talk about the horrors.

Frankly, I can just imagine the stonewalling that will happen when anybody tries to convene a commission to see what went wrong.

Updated On: 9/5/05 at 12:28 PM

[pab]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:34pm

Well, this will all be moot if the people who did not vote in last election do the same in the next one. The drive to get the disenfranchised to register is NOW because a lot of the people in the red states will continue to stick with the status quo no matter what tragedy happens. Just look at the fact that there are actually pro war demonstrations in the wake of the Cindy Sheehan anti-war movement.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:38pm

and that's one of the reasons why you are indispensible, namo. because as much as some people love to label you as a caustic, bitter queen, that's just your crusty (and i mean that in every sense of the word) exterior and inside you're just wonderfully gooey, like a payday bar left out at the beach. without passion, we're empty shells.

**update**

"indispensible" (even when spelled correctly) sounds kinda condescending and patronizing, but it's not meant in that way, but rather in the best sense of the word in that that the world would be a colder place without the fire that namo brings.

Updated On: 9/5/05 at 12:38 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:47pm

Jesus Christ, you just Bill "I Feel Your Pain" Clintoned me. Guess I have to Monica Lewinsky you now. (Again!)

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 12:52pm

get the f*** away from me with that cigar!

Posted: 9/5/05 at 1:58pm

"The thing is, I kind of hate all the strategizing, as if politics is a football game. I hate football just as I hate the sort of detached analysis of how people get themselves elected, how they get control and power without any inclusion of the impact on human life."

It's statements like this that consistently remind me how much Namo and I have in common philosophically. But I would also say that, despite all of papa's protestations to the contrary, he has more in common than he would dare admit. It all boils down to how willing you are to accept the status quo. Differences in sociological theory do not necessarily have to mean differences in humaneness.

As to the next elective cycle, I can envision the Democrats trying to use this situation in a negative way, and the Republicans pointing out the politicization of human tragedy - reference 9/11 for an example. As is often the case, papa gives the most objective overview as to what the Dems need to do.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:09pm

Of course, it's only a week old, and Rove has already reconvened his swift boat rowing team to slime all Louisiana Dems in power. That's the strategy -- to suggest that all local officials barred Bush and Company from doing the fine work they really, really wanted to do.

I checked in at David "Axis of Evil" Frum's website, and he's already expressing outrage at the left, daring to employ a "have you no shame?" higher road rhetoric to indict critics. They are so smug and prissy now, full of "we're doing or job, and they want to point fingers!" bs. (Can you imagine their reponse, had this happened on a Democratic presidential watch?)

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:15pm

I hate the football mentality of it all, as well--though I am guilty of siding with my team against W at times.

I hate the hypocrisies and double standards and spin on both sides. I want honesty and truth. I believe that truth is the only path to true success.

But, I just don't see how this catastrophe, the Rove scandal, the war, and gas prices are going to keep GOPs in office. Unless the Dems **** it all up.

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:20pm

I keep thinking of Kerry showing up at the convention - "reporting for duty". Never underestimate the Democrat's ability not to 'get it'.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:24pm

You know (and I know this isn't likely true of you, DGrant) I am disgusted by the post game analysis that came as soon as Kerry conceded. Half of the country was all behind him and had he won, would have talked on end about how wonderful his campaign was and how terrible the Bush campaign was.

But because Kerry lost, suddenly it was this "are you crazy to have thought he could have won with THAT campaign" (though he ALMOST did win)?? "Bush's campaign was just fantastic!"

And, I think it's BS.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:37pm

Re the analyzing,I find myself feeling very LAdy MacB right now. "THUS thou must do if thou wouldst have it". Power in itself is neutral it is the use it is or IS NOT put to that affects us all. I can not say what the Dems would have done but knowing what the GOP didn't do, well- reap what u sow -have your power removed by an angry electorate. Hey, a rough justice.

[Plum]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 2:56pm

I doubt Katrina will have a huge direct effect on midterms, because FEMA and DHS are executive branch creatures. But as a way of killing any positive feelings that are left for the current regime, yeah, I can see it having an effect.

All I know is that I'm looking forward to getting rid of Santorum with an almost unholy glee.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 3:04pm

glad ya clarified, jerby, because i got a big kick out of d's comment at the time:
the gag reflex

[Bluemoon]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 5:53pm

Interesting ABCNews/Washington Post poll out today:

"Americans are broadly critical of government preparedness in the Hurricane Katrina disaster — but far fewer take George W. Bush personally to task for the problems, and public anger about the response is less widespread than some critics would suggest."

Yes No
Federal government adequately prepared? 31% 67%
State/local government adequately prepared? 24 75
Blame Bush? 44 55

http://abcnews.go.com/US/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1094262&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312



Updated On: 9/5/05 at 05:53 PM

[Plum]

Posted: 9/5/05 at 6:12pm

Give it time. No one really knows what the long-term effects will be right now. Once we're out of the thick of things and start summarizing instead, we'll see.