Something tells me we’re going to have a decision election this time around. No more strict sectionalism (as has happened since 2000 with a foreshadowing in 1996), but a beginning of a building of official consensus (official being what’s agreed upon by those who are allowed to care enough) towards which way the nation will go.
I have two scenarios in mind for the coming elections, which will depict the decision that’s being made:
First, a Democratic Victory:
Basically, Obama and the Dems (thinking that whatever Obama does rubs off on the Democrats) hold most of what they have (Indiana’s gone, and it don’t deserve saving if you ask this Hoosier-never-wannabee), plus add on the rest of the East Coast, Missouri, Arizona and Montana. Other areas presently Reddened up (done in the early nineties so as to promote Geographic Continuity…or, more to the point, to show the Republican’s Southern Strategy succeeding) have more and more blue in them.
Along with this, imagine the Democrats holding onto (or even adding to) their Senate Majority and rebuilding a majority in the house.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Second, a Republican Victory:
So…how to explain the remaining Blue states?
- Small, yet singularly populous areas that are still too populated to be overwhelmed by the wave of red (New York, Maryland, Illinois, Washington – Four states that had 60%+ for Kerry in 2004, yet could have had a small area removed from itself and happily gone Republican)
- Just too Democratic (California, Hawaii, Rhode Island and Connecticut. Massachusetts is thrown in this as I think they’ll vote Democratic; same with Delaware. Yes, I said Delaware might go Republican last posting. Not fully sure about Delaware at the moment)
- Set aside to punish, plunder and serve as reminders as why you support the one percent as they rape you (Minnesota and Michigan, bastions of Liberalism and Socialism that will suffer punishment as Wisconsin has been turned).
Add to that the overwhelming takeover of the Senate (55 seats low, maybe even 60 or 61) and veto-proof numbers in the House for the Republicans.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Is there any difference? I can think of a couple.
First off, the guy who wins the next Election is likely to pick three or four Supreme Court judges. Two to the left, two to the right. With Obama as President it could get to 6-3 to the left, with Romney as President we’re looking at 7-2 to the right. Either way, we’re talking 20-30 years of rulings.
Also, since we’re talking about number levels that would border on rulership, the laws will reflect the will of the ruling party – even without the Supreme Court going their way (which cannot last, given the age of some of the judges).
And understand this: While Obama may be quite inept and seems happy in giving the Fiscal Right Wing of the Republican Party (and libertarians, although they’ll admit it even less than your everyday dishonest Republican) he’s had a lot to fight against. Romney I can easily see as competent and evil. Evil because he’ll turn the USA’s drift towards corporate feudalism into a full-on rush to embrace (and be raped by) corporate feudalism; competent because he IS competent.
Listen to Romney speak – the guy says what he means and explains himself in a way that anyone can understand. When he said “I’m not concerned about the very poor,” he then said “Because they’re being taken care of. I’m more concerned about the working poor.” Never mind his seeming disconnection that his job was to disemploy as many people as he could and take their wages as his profit (that’s what money does when there’s too much out there – those with it come to love harming those who aren’t in a position to hold onto their share); he’s smart and knows how to get his points across.
And meanwhile, in the Supreme Court, we have Obama’s Gamble. Not only will the Health Bill stand or fall with the Supreme Court (as the Conservatives in the court prefer to see the bill as a whole, to stand and fall as such) but the whole of Obama’s legacy and electability. Remember, there’s a sizable portion of the populace who’s waiting on the court to make up THEIR (the populace’s) mind on whether Obama’s health care is constitutional (and therefore legal) or not. Enough on both sides to turn a 50-50 proposition to a 65-35 proposition one way or the other.
Either Government will be seen as a way of solving problems, or can only be seen as the protector of property and wealth. Pro-active, or Re-active. Able to help, or only able to mess things up.
So the maps above.