Pat Buchanan

I read the Buchanan article. A couple of points:

First, the commentary after the recent election on how the 2006 elections will be all Democrat and how the GOP is in a free fall is nothing short of bunk. Quick quiz: in 1993, after Bill Clinton entered office, who was voted in a Govcernor of VA and NJ - yep Republicans. How about in 1997? - If you said Republicans. you'd be right.

Now, surely in 2001, after Bush was elected and was in the midst of historic poll numbers the Republicans held on to the VA and NJ state houses, right? Nope, lost 'em both. And, predictably we lost them this year.

What does this mean for 2006? Not a darned thing. While in 1994, there was a revolution of sorts, in 1998, Dems picked up seats in Congress (despite Republican wins in 1997). Then, in 2002, after 2001 Demcratic victories in NJ and VA, the Republicans won big.

What does this mean? That the NJ ad VA elections mean slightly less to the election results next year than a butterfly flapping its wings in Africa does.

Moving on, do President's poll numbers spell doom, as Mr. Buchanan predicts? The answer again is, no. One, as I've said here before, in light of his poll numbers I woudl not advise the President to seek a third term. Other then that, I am unconcerned by the President's numbers, good or bad. Redistricting has made it very difficult to remove incumbants from office. Further, demographic shifts have basically solidified each party's hold on its base areas. Losing seats next year will be tough for either party.

As for the Senate, while there are some close races (PA, MT, OH & RI), even if we lose them all, we still have the majority. I don't, however, expect that we will lose all of the close races. In any event, the role fo the President and the GOP on these races shoudl not be overstated. people typically vote for their candidate. People do not vote against someone because of party affiliation.

Lastly, the GOP is in the process of cutting $54 billion of pork from the budget and has time to work to improve its image. The GOP is not dead as Buchanan suggests, and it should not advocate the anti-trade policies he advocates for in the article.