RE: Arlen Specter's New "Affiliation" Should Come as No Real Surprise

A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.

Arlen Specter becoming a democrat on paper does little, if anything, in regards to the balance of power on the Hill. Much like Joseph Lieberman becoming an Independent did little to change the balance of power when he made the switch. Specter will vote the same as he always has, especially on major issues where a Senator is responsible more to his constituents than his party. If there is an effect it will be on small issues in which he is whipped into voting with the party.

The real significance of the move is that it means that Democrats are now completely responsible for what happens over the next few years. They will reap the rewards or take the blame. There is nowhere left to hide. Republicans can no longer be blamed for obstructing "progress". Democrats, and liberals by and large, will now live and die by the value of their own ideas.

Republicans should be excited about this idea. The last time that liberals had this much control was in 1978. It was a miserable failure and gave birth to the Reagan Revolution. With the success of the Tea Parties and Obama's falling approval rating, it is fairly likely that Republicans will gain seats in the House and Senate in 2010, at least until you look at the numbers.

The House is wide open and if the Republicans are to make an serious movement, then it will be in the House. The Senate is not nearly as favorable. There are likely to be 10 Senate seats that will be seriously contested. Only four of those seats belong to Democrats. Two of the seats belong to Harry Reid and Chris Dodd. As unpopular as those two are amongst conservatives, they will probably be re-elected in their home states of Nevada and Connecticut. The third seat is Burris in Illinois, and I don't see Republicans picking up that seat in Obama's backyard. The only seat that Republicans can reasonably pick up is the seat in Colorado, and only if Ryan Frazier stays an "it" guy.

The problem is that the six contested Republican seats could all possibly fall. There are open seats in Florida, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Ohio. Florida and Ohio are toss ups, but both states voted Obama and neither state has a real solid Republican candidate. New Hampshire is very blue and will likely vote in a Democrat, and the Democratic candidate in Missouri has a very well known and respected family name, Robin Carnahan (she is Secretary of State in MO, her dad was governor, her mom was a Senator, and her brother is a Congressman).

Other problem seats for Republicans are in Louisiana and North Carolina. The Republican Senator in Louisiana, David Vitter, will have an uphill fight due to his involvement in a sex scandal. Sen. Richard Burr (R) will have a tough time in North Carolina. North Carolina voted for Obama, ousted Elizabeth Dole (R) in the last election, and voted in a Democrat as governor.

While it may be conventional logic, and the hopes of Republicans, that Americans will tire of Democratic control of Capitol Hill and the White House and vote in Republicans in 2010, the breakdown of the actual races does not match up with the logic, at least in the Senate.

In order for Republicans to not lose even more control of the Senate in 2010, there is going to have to be a dramatic shift to the right by Americans. Democrats are going to have to fail, and that fail is going to have to be epic. So epic that it will cause a real political shift in currently blue states. Democrats are going to have to prove completely inept while in power to cause such a dramatic shift, much like they did in 1978 and 1979.

Oh yeah, Republicans also have to find a charasmatic leader. Luckily, the last time Democrats were in total control, Republicans found that leader.

-The Banker