Are you asking if it would have made a difference if people knew if Rummy resigned the day before rather than the day before the elections? Probably not that much. However, had he resigned months before the elections, I think it would have made a big difference. Then again, that was my position at the time, too. He did good things with regard to restructuring the military, no question. But when he did nothing to regain control after the wave of sectarian violence following the (first) Samarrah mosque bombing, that was the last straw for me. There were many others, but that was the last one. And besides, by that time they had a very competent person in place to oversee the military restructuring, Gen. Schoomaker.

I meant "the day before rather than the day after the elections". Sorry about that.

I don't think it would have mattered.

As much as the media wants to make it "all about Iraq", Republicans lost the house and senate because they were conducting business as usual instead of conducting the business of the US. They were gorging on pork and doing other things that really weren't about running the county. The Dems, of course, are doing even worse now.

kimsch - yes. But it was about Iraq also. Though it turns out that many people wanted the change there to be victory and not defeat. The Democrats had a "plan" for defeat. And even they aren't really willing to vote for that. They're willing to propagandize and work towards defeat - but not vote for it.

Kahn,

So the Democrats running on a campaign for defeat, won huge victories. That's brilliant. Maybe they can run on a poverty for all campaign in 08, and the Dow will hit 20,000!

I would like to point out, inspite if you like it or not, you guys are the "kooks." Bush struggles to keep his approval ratings in the 30-35% range, 70% of people think the country is headed in the wrong direction.

While the Democrats have their own problems, and their is no savior on either side, all but the most die hard conservatives have wised up to the BS of the past 7 years. While you guys continue to bail out water of a sinknig ship, this administration keeps drilling holes in the hull. But keep it up, the rest of us are really looking forward to 2008.

If Rummy had resigned a month before the election and new leadership were in the Pentagon it would have saved some Republicans, but for the most part the damage was done.

Peace, Gaijin

Not much difference, IMHO. Incumbents lost for reasons including, but not limited to, the Battle of Iraq in the GWOT. The base was dissatisfied with the lack of conservatism. Great damage was done to what Reagan started, and Newt shaped.

Now, it's time to wake up and smell the Java. For those of you named liberalTHC, IQofZero, and stevomoron, that's coffee.

All the Donkaroaches are running against Bush and Rove; at least one has admitted it--Breck Girl. We must do what we can to prevent them from winning.

Oh, wait, I live in MD, aka Massachussetts of the Mid-Atlantic. Therefore, you must do what you can...

Gaijin - "huge victories"?????

Kahn: Gaijin - "huge victories"?????

I suppose "huge" is in the eye of the beholder. But here are the 2006 numbers:
House: Dem pickups = 31, Rep pickups = 0
Senate: Dem pickups = 6, Rep pickups = 0
Governors: Dem pickups = 6, Rep pickups = 0
Dems net gain in state legislature seats: ~350

The 2008 elections are going to be critical on a variety of levels, of course. But one level that often gets overlooked is the state level. Why is that? Well, because redistricting occurs in 2011. Governors and (most) state senators that are elected in 2008 will still be sitting in 2011.