Changing the subject
How effective has the President been in changing the subject from the election of a lot of Democrats to something about his administration. Check out the Memorandum link aggregation this evening. The top half of the blog is about Rumsfeld's resignation and Gates appointment. There may never be a better example of the "bully pulpit." The NY Times still managed to combine the two, but the resignation got the top billing.
As for the size of the losses in this election it falls into the average category for a second term president in his sixth year. Charles Krauthammer pretty much nailed it on November 3, 2006.
Update: A Large Regular has an "exclusive interview" with the former Secretary of Defense. Goodness gracious. Very funny.
As for the size of the losses in this election it falls into the average category for a second term president in his sixth year. Charles Krauthammer pretty much nailed it on November 3, 2006.
...Since much of the media has lost the art of putting facts in perspective, it is nice of Krauthammer to preemptively remind us. What we have was something much less than a Democrat wave. It was really just a six year average election.
What to say about such a victory? Substantial, yes. Historic, no. Before proclaiming a landslide, one has to ask Henny Youngman's question: "Compared to what?" (His answer to: "How's your wife?") Since the end of World War II, the average loss for a second-term presidency in its sixth year has been 29 House seats and six Senate seats. If you go back to Franklin Roosevelt's second term, the House loss average jumps to 35. Thus a 25/6 House and Senate loss would be about (and slightly below) the historical average.
...
Update: A Large Regular has an "exclusive interview" with the former Secretary of Defense. Goodness gracious. Very funny.
Comments
Post a Comment