Well, I’m now on record as the most accurate predictor of the outcome of the 2018 mid-term elections [I know all of my readers are astute people who see the dry humor in statements like that I make now and then 😊.] Here are the predictions I made in my last post, Your Country Needs You [checkmark equals “100% accurate”:]
- ✔️It is the 310th day of 2018. ✔️In Washington, DC, the sun will rise at 6:41am and set at 5:02pm.
- ✔️By about 11:00 to 12:00pm Eastern Time, possibly much sooner, one [and only one] of the following will be true come January*:
- Republicans Will Have Majorities In Both The House And The Senate.
- ✔️Republicans Will Have A Majority In The Senate But Not In The House.
- Republicans Will Have A Majority In The House But Not In The Senate.
- Democrats Will Have Majorities In Both The House And In The Senate.
[I should point out that ✔️technical peculiarities in some states [e.g., Mississippi] could postpone full knowledge of the election outcome considerably — days, maybe even weeks. ✔️The more extremely close races there are, the higher the probability of delays in learning the final outcome.]
- Regardless of which of the above is true, …
- ✔️millions of people will be happy about that outcome,
- ✔️millions will be unhappy about it,
- ✔️millions won’t care what it was
- ✔️and millions won’t even know what it was —
- ✔️and Republican Donald Trump will still be President.
✔️Neither of two historically reliable indicators [overall turnout rate or the fact that since 1934 the party of a newly elected president has suffered an average loss of 23 seats in the House in the following midterm] matters in this election, so the effect of high turnout on November 6 cannot be accurately predicted because we will not know until well after November 6 WHO actually turned out to make that number so high.
So What Now?
Of the four possible outcomes [the above list,] the “winner” was Door #2: Republicans Will Have A Majority In The Senate But Not In The House. Here’s how I described that scenario last week. … “Gridlock might worsen some, but if the Democrat majority in the House results in more by-partisan bills from that chamber [which I think might be the case,] the Senate might be more likely to reach bipartisan agreement on more merged House-Senate bills that the President would not veto. Also, if another Supreme Court vacancy occurs, the court would continue its shift toward constitutional adherence.”
As it sits only four days later, one day after the election, it appears I was too optimistic on the legislative part of that assessment. Based on statements already being made by soon-to-be committee chairs, the Democrats will apparently continue shooting themselves in the foot for two more years — i.e., only two “planks” in their “platform:” 1) vigorously oppose whatever Trump is for; and 2) team with an eagerly supportive mainstream media to constantly accentuate all negatives and hide all positives about Trump [personally, and wherever possible without embarrassing themselves, his administration.] They seem to believe that they are now emboldened to double down on that agenda with the added ability to launch investigation after investigation — now with subpoena power.
I like the way former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell [a Democrat] expressed what they should do instead: “Don’t just investigate; legislate!” I can only hope they will listen to this kind of counsel — but so far, I won’t be holding my breath. Only time will tell, but for now I’d say we should brace ourselves for daily “breaking news” of revelations in numerous investigations taking up most of the media coverage for the foreseeable future.
Thanks for reading this post, and if you regularly follow my Blog, for that, too. Please consider sharing this or other posts with your friends, colleagues and associates.
Charles M. Jones