November 9, 2002

THE BIG 6-0:

GOP Appears to Have Big Mo' for 2004 (Chris Cillizza and Josh Kurtz, November 07, 2002, Roll Call)
As Democrats sifted through the rubble of Tuesday night's historic vote, strategists on both sides of the aisle warned of the potentially dire implications for the minority party in election cycles to come.

Aside from the likely momentum for the Bush agenda, the Democrats' defeat could also demoralize their Senators and House Members, especially those contemplating retirement in 2004.

Leading that list is Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.), who will lose the chairmanship of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee when the Senate reconvenes. Hollings, who will be 82 years old on Election Day 2004, is likely to be challenged by Rep. Joe Wilson (R) in the event he runs for re-election.

Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), who will be 80 in November 2004, may also be more inclined to retire from the minority than he would have been had Democrats held the majority.

Senate Majority Leader Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.), who seems likely to bear the brunt of the blame for the loss of Senate control, is also now being mentioned as a possible retiree. If Daschle steps down, expect Rep. John Thune (R), who appears to have lost his race to Sen.Tim Johnson (D) on Tuesday, and attorney Stephanie Herseth( D), who was defeated narrowly by Gov. Bill Janklow (R) for the state's at-large House seat, to emerge as the nominees for Daschle's seat in 2004.

Republicans appear to have an advantage on the Senate playing field at the start of the '04 cycle. Democrats must defend 19 seats, compared to 15 for the Republicans. At this early stage, only Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-Ill.) is thought to be particularly vulnerable on the GOP side.


It is entirely feasible that--if Saddam is gone from power and the economy is revived in '04--George W. Bush could carry in a filibuster-proof majority of 60+ GOP senators. Posted by Orrin Judd at November 9, 2002 8:24 AM
Comments

As Michael Barone said earlier today, this cycle is beginning to look an awlful lot like the '60-'64 cycle, with the party roles reversed.

Posted by: Charles Rostkowski at November 9, 2002 9:08 AM

There is a spooky similarity with the VP losing a fraud marred election and then a national security crisis helping the freshman prez hold seats. Hopefully we can avoid the rest of the JFK scenario.

Posted by: oj at November 9, 2002 9:56 AM

Actually, the similarities extend a lot further. In fact, the similarities can be extended to FDR and Reagan, respectively.



FDR was a popular wartime (WWII) president who was able to pass major legislation (New Deal) that altered the public's view of the government's role. He was followed by his VP (Truman), who served one term and became less popular through that term. Truman was followed by a member of the opposite party (Eisenhower), who solidified most of the New Deal program. Eisenhower was followed by a member of the opposite party (JFK) who ran for president on tax cuts and faced a major foreign policy crisis (Cuban Missile Crisis) early in his term.



Reagan was a popular wartime (Cold War) president who was able to pass major legislation (tax cuts) that altered the public's view of the government's role. He was followed by his VP (Bush), who served one term and became less popular through that term. Bush was followed by a member of the opposite party (Clinton), who solidified most of the Reagan's program by passing free trade legislation, signing welfare reform, and deregulating telecom. Clinton was followed by a member of the opposite party (W.) who ran for president on tax cuts and faced a major foreign policy crisis (9/11) early in his term.



Eerie, huh? I certainly hope the similarities end soon, however.

Posted by: Greg at November 9, 2002 3:28 PM

Have you seen the stuff about the rule of 72? That American politics runs in 72 year cycles and the last one began in '32.

Posted by: oj at November 9, 2002 7:45 PM

2004? Ever heard the adage "A week is a long time in politics?" There more than a hundred to go.



Noel Erinjeri

Posted by: Noel Erinjeri at November 9, 2002 9:38 PM

A rising tide lifts all boats...

Posted by: oj at November 10, 2002 11:54 AM

The 60-40 prediction does not even account for Pelosi taking the party hard left, which will be hung around Senators necks even if she is in the House. That in turn could spark a number of defections, like Miller and Breaux.

Posted by: Andrew X at November 10, 2002 11:08 PM
« HAPPIER DAYS FOR DEMOCRATS: | Main | THE RIORDAN CANARD: »