Not So Much Voting For As Voting Against - Rasmussen

As I write this the polls in my home state of New Hampshire open in 12 and a half hours. I have a feeling the results are going to be shocking to some (particularly Democrats). But even if the Republicans do well and take control of the House of Representatives and make a dent in the Democrat majority in the Senate, it doesn't mean the GOP has a carte blanche to go back to the old way of doing things. Just as in the previous two elections, minority party victories can't be taken as the people voting for them so much as voting against the majority party.

But none of this means that Republicans are winning. The reality is that voters in 2010 are doing the same thing they did in 2006 and 2008: They are voting against the party in power.

This is the continuation of a trend that began nearly 20 years ago. In 1992, Bill Clinton was elected president and his party had control of Congress. Before he left office, his party lost control. Then, in 2000, George W. Bush came to power, and his party controlled Congress. But like Mr. Clinton before him, Mr. Bush saw his party lose control.

That's never happened before in back-to-back administrations. The Obama administration appears poised to make it three in a row. This reflects a fundamental rejection of both political parties.

More precisely, it is a rejection of a bipartisan political elite that's lost touch with the people they are supposed to serve. Based on our polling, 51% now see Democrats as the party of big government and nearly as many see Republicans as the party of big business. That leaves no party left to represent the American people.(emphasis added – ed.)

If neither party can shake itself of the political and philosophical dead weight that has made both parties disliked by the American people, the people themselves will push them aside. The GOP has already started seeing this, with what is in effect a civil war going on within its ranks.

The GOP establishment was being ignored by the rank and file (many of whom support the Tea party) during the various state primaries, electing candidates the establishment didn't want and wouldn't endorse, in turn knocking out a number of RINO incumbents. The same will likely be true during tomorrow's elections. If the GOP establishment doesn't start listening to the rank and file, they will either be replaced or the GOP will find itself going the way of the Whigs. The same could be said of the Democrats, too.

Far too many disaffected Democrats see the party they grew up with and supported being taken over by far left elements that also do a pretty good job of ignoring the American people. Is it any surprise there a number of Democrats supporting the Tea party as well?

It will be interesting to see what happens in Washington after the 112th Congress is sworn in and gets to work. (It will also be interesting, and a little scary, to see what Pelosi, Reid, and Obama will try to pull off during the lame duck session of Congress after the elections.) Both will bear watching. And if the Congresscritters haven't learned their lessons, we'll be more than happy to throw them out bag and baggage.

As a side note, I received this about Tuesday's elections from part time WP contributor Bill:

If it is truth that a strong centralized government of any kind can not occupy the same place as a strong self determined citizenry, then only one of two "fundamental transformations" will succeed: This Government's transformation of the American character and country, or We the People's fundamental transformation and restoring of the Government. There can be no middle ground, winner take all.

And then he ads this admonition to those not bothering to vote tomorrow:

Iraqi's and Afghani's risk being shot merely attempting to vote. What's our excuse? Voter apathy is, I believe, one of the most basic cornerstone's of the entire situation we find ourselves in.