Why this isn't 1994.

[yellowcanine]

Republicans can't credibly run as the party of change. It wasn't that long ago that they were in charge of both the House and the White House.

The Democrats will not be caught napping as they were in 1994. This has implications both for candidates and voters. Democrats had been in charge for so long that it just did not seem feasible that the Republicans would take over in 1994. Fear is a good motivating factor and this year there is plenty of it on the part of both Democratic candidates and Democratic voters.

The Republicans, while enjoying the historical advantages of the opposition party two years in to a new President following relatively big gains for the President's party the last two election cycles, have not made the most of their advantage so far. They do not have a unified positive message, as they did in 1994, as fraudulent as it was, particularly the term limits part, the Contract for America did help their cause. And not only do they not have a unified message, they are bickering and cannot agree what the message should be or who should carry it. Michael Steele, their national chair, has been marginalized. They can't decide if the Tea Party crowd is in or out of the Republican Party. They have not managed to recruit and get nominated attractive candidates in many cases. In fact, just the opposite has happened. There is an extraordinarily large amount of negative baggage in many cases even to the point of wackiness. The worst possible thing for the Republican Party has happened - Sarah Palin has emerged as the de facto national Republican leader. She is the glue holding together the Tea Party/Republican Party coalition, such as it is. This is not only a bad thing for 2010, it is a very bad thing for 2012. Sooner or later, and probably sooner, the Tea Party is going to implode and take significant chunks of the Republican base with it.

Immigration. The Republicans made a major mistake here by demonizing Hispanic immigrants. This is an emotional gut level issue and Hispanic voters and others are going to make them pay for it. Many of these will be new voters so they will not register in the "likely voter" models. This will create some major surprises in November. The real damage is long term, but the outcomes of many races in 2010 will be impacted as well.

Racial politics back lash among African Americans. While it is true that some of the luster has gone off of Obama, even with African Americans, he is still a hero to many of all races. And the Republicans have managed to offend many in their not too subtle attacks that could be seen as racial, fair or not (and Republicans do not get the benefit of the doubt here in most cases). African Americans know the history of code language used by politicians to play the race card against African Americans and Republicans are going to get punished here as well. Again, many of those who are motivated this way will not show up in the "likely voter" models, so more surprises are in store on election day.

And then there is money. The Democratic money advantage will be very helpful in GOTV efforts - which could make a big difference in a number of races - the Senate races in Nevada and Kentucky come to mind but there are many others.

I do think Democrats are going to take a pretty big hit, particularly in the House. But right now I don't see the Republicans capturing the House or the Senate.

Oh - one more. People have forgotten but at least part of the mix in 1994 was the House Post Office scandal. Republicans and Democrats were implicated but Democrats were in charge so they paid the bill for the scandal. Scandal motivates the opposition party and holds down the vote of the ruling party.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

1. Let me be the first to recommend

I have refused thus far to believe that we are in for another 1994-esque electoral "bloodbath" at the polls. It will be interesting to see what happens in November but- for many of the reasons you cited (among others)-I don't see them capturing the House and/or the Senate. My greatest concern is voter turnout among Democrats (the so-called "enthusiasm gap") and our constituencies. However, as long as the DNC and OFA (and the rest of us) make a decent GOTV effort and are out there trying to make sure people understand the consequences of voting Republican or simply not voting at all, I think we'll ultimately be o.k. though. There's already some evidence that the "enthusiasm gap" is starting to narrow and there's been an uptick in the polls for President Obama and some Democratic candidates. Thanks for your clear headed and rational analysis.

I can't believe that there are some people whom are suggesting that President Obama and the Democratic Party is purposely trying to "tank" this election because they secretly want Republican policies but don't want to be caught dead actually voting for them. :crazy:

[county worker]

2. The thing that happened in 1994 was that Dems did not bother to vote.

The only thing that makes this the same as 1994 is that again Dems do not plan to vote. All else is meaningless.

[craigmatic]

3. Usually at the end of a long period of control of congress scandals start coming out about the

incumbent party. No such thing has happened to democrats this time unless you count the two trials in the house. I just don't see the repubs taking more than 25 or 26 seats and we still keep the house.