Calmes: GOP, spare us the bothsides-ism when it comes to the Pelosi attack ads
A long time ago, a political operative in Wisconsin made a calculation that paid off in spades: “He thought, you know, that after the 2012 election his work on John Anderson’s election campaign would be the key to the future success of the party. He said that if you take a look at Wisconsin and you look at Pennsylvania, and you really look at the congressional map, and you look at the people and the parties who are going to dominate both houses of the state legislature, both chambers of the state legislature, the governors of both the states, you go back to the beginning,” the operative explained to me, “you can win the House or the Senate. Do you think there’s any way the Democrat Party could have won the House or the Senate in that state? In a state that is the center of the country, the most conservative, the most conservative in the country, the most purple of states?”
There is no question that the 2016 elections have been the most significant in the history of the modern Republican Party. I would even go so far as to credit the 2016 election as the definitive Republican victory. The 2016 elections have been a tale of two halves: the Democratic Party has been decimated not only in the US Senate. But also in the House.
But even as the Republicans have held on in the Senate, they have been losing in the House. This is a problem not just for the Republicans, but also for the Democrats. Because without the Democrats in the House, it is hard to control government. For example: on an issue that is arguably more important than anything else — healthcare — Democrats control most of Congress by only a 2 to 1 majority. So, when it comes to healthcare, the Republicans have to have someone accountable who can pass bills and have any hope of being able to vote on them. The Democrats lack someone to do that.
And the House is not the only political power center with a shortage