New at Reason

January 9, 2007

As the Democrats count down their first 100 hours, reason asks a slate of pundits, journalists, and advocates what we can expect from divided government .

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

← Jell-O Shooter Man Avoids Jail-O, Finds… | Main | Ordem e Oppresso →

See all 12 comments | Leave a comment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

|1.9.07 @ 9:36AM|#

If the Dems are responsible for that OSU loss as their first act in that 100 hrs, then I say give 'em 200.

|1.9.07 @ 10:02AM|#

I hope cinnabob and the entire state of Florida break off and sink into the ocean.

|1.9.07 @ 10:11AM|#

Amen to that, Mike.

|1.9.07 @ 3:49PM|#

Thirded.

|1.9.07 @ 4:54PM|#

4th'ed

mw|1.9.07 @ 5:47PM|#

I thought this was a comment thread on the Reason "divided government" article, but see it is actually a support thread for bitter Buckeyes. ChicagoTom at least should get over it, and enjoy the Bears Sherman-esque march to the Superbowl. But back to the article...

The article is a good retrospective and rehash of views that have been expressed here and elsewhere repeatedly over the last year on Divided Government. There is nothing new in the article, and conspicuously missing is any notion of the ramifications of the divided government meme for the '08 presidential election.

Assuming that the divided government benefits hold true to form (as oulined by Niskanen), and a divided government result remains as desireable in '08 as it did in '06, there are some important elements of that election to consider.

Specifically, it seems unlikely that the Democrats will be able to screw up as badly in two years as it took the Republicans six to acheive, so it is doubtful that the Democrats will lose their significant majority in the House. Although the Senate majority is razor thin, structural factors give the Democrats a big advantage in '08. Of the 33 Senate seats contested in 2008, 21 are held by Republicans and 12 by Democrats. Simple numbers - the Republicans have a lot more at risk, and will be playing defense. The Democrats have many more opportunities to take seats than Republicans. Advantage Democrats.

Conclusion: The only way to maintain a divided government in '09, is to elect a Republican President in '08.

If we then layer on the fact that GWB is hell bent on making sure the war is even more unpopular and a bigger issue in '08 than it is now, one wonders whether any Republican can be elected President in '08. Turns out there is exactly one Republican presidential hopeful who has been on the right side of the war since '03. That, IMO, makes him the only electable Republican in '08.

An that makes Chuck Hagel the Divided Government Presidential Candidate of choice.

|1.9.07 @ 11:04PM|#

Maybe Lincoln Chaffee should run.

|1.10.07 @ 1:36AM|#

My honeymoon with the Dems came to a crashing halt a few days ago, when incoming Ways and Means chairasshole Chuck Rangel crowed, "Social Security will NEVER be privatized!"

Gridlock? Bring it on...

mw|1.10.07 @ 10:04AM|#

Lincoln has a big "L" tatooed on his forehead after losing his Senate seat. Plus the Republican base hates him even more than they hate Hagel. No chance as a Republican. Perhaps he could jump on the Unity08 deal.

|1.10.07 @ 11:23AM|#

mw,

The bitterness started with cinnabob.

mw|1.10.07 @ 2:04PM|#

Not to be picky Timon19, but Cinnabob is clearly gloating, which is pretty much the opposite of bitter. No, the bitterness seems to reside exclusively with the Buckeyes.