From Neural Gourmet...
Must Democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2006 in order to regain the White House in 2008? Should the country endure 2 more years of unmitigated Republican policy such that Americans can be amply demonstrated of Republican incompetence and corruption? Some Democrats think so...
So, have you all seen
Adam Nagourney's column in today's NY Times? Nagourney lays out a rather rational, though misguided, case that winning control of Congress in 2006 may be the worst thing the Democrats could do:
Is it really in the best interest of the Democratic Party to win control of the House and Senate in November? Might the party's long-term fortunes actually be helped by falling short?
Nagourney's argument is, if I'm reading correctly, that for the Democrats to get a slim majority in the House and Senate would still leave them out of control of the government and ineffectual thus burdening the Dems with all the responsibility of the failings of the Bush administration with no power to do anything about it.
Full opinion piece
here.