Thursday, 6 November 2014

The Nuke of a Nuke

I've sat and read over twenty commentaries around the election.  Some dealt with the serious nature of the message.  Some talked up how bad it'd be get the President and the Senate on one page.  Some were negative.  Some were positive.

Something is about to occur, and change will occur.

If not, let me introduce to the nuke of a nuke scenario.

The President decides not to agree with the Republican Senate, does executive orders, and vetoes continually for the next year.  We get into July of 2015 with the Iowa and South Carolina primary episode in full swing, and Democrats showing up to talk their prospective the voters. Reporters ask these guys....do you support the President's executive orders?  Do you support the negative agenda?  Do you support the President himself?

It's a bad position....being Democrat and condemning your guy.  It makes the party look negative and stupid.

Out of the twelve guys running....only one will go ultra-negative on the President and blast him.....getting the first four state primaries, and thus killing off the crowd.  The problem is that the President looks lame and stupid while this guy of his own party is knocking him.

The Senate race in 2016?  A huge number of Republicans, but most all of them in this scenario would win....at best one guy might lose.

The Democrats?  I count four races where a poor two year period of the President would harm their chances, and have Republican replacements (CO, CA, NV, OR).  Toss in 2018's race, and another three might fall to Republicans.  Sixty Republican senators by 2018....if they continue with the President's past strategy.

The party needs to drag the President's team into a room and just say.....it's done.  We want a simple two-topic 2015 period (Immigration and tax reform)....nothing else.  We want limited press coverage of the President for all of 2015.  Act lame, and the Party will limit damage.  It's simple.

So, as bad you think it might be....by 2018, it might be a lot worse, if you were a Democrat.  

No comments: