Many of the Democrat commercials in the important races in the D.C. area (Virginia Senate, Maryland Senate, Maryland Governor as examples) are relying quite heavily on the anti-Bush sentiment to bring them voters.  There are literally hundreds of attack ads aired each week with "the other guy's" name shown on the screen at the same time as an image or sound bite from President George W. Bush is shown.  If not that, then we have images that show President George W. Bush speaking on behalf of a candidate and those sound bites being repeated ad nauseum.  Or, finally, we have images with candidates (like Michael Steele) that stumped for President George W. Bush during his re-election campaign.

The entire idea -- obviously -- is to link the candidates as closely as possible to President George W. Bush and then rely on the idea that voters will run to the polls and vote for your candidate because they aren't George W. Bush and aren't tied to him at the hip.  The funny thing is that Democrats tried that approach back in 2004 and found that it failed.  I guess at the time they hadn't slung enough mud, and hadn't received enough bad (good in their minds) news out of Iraq to really be able to capitalize.

I still hope that they (the Democrats) basically get their asses handed back to them for using this approach, but if somehow it really does work, then what?

I know others have written some comments about "when the Democrats take control", and I've spoken up a little in those articles, but I'm gonna write out a few more thoughts here and offer the space in the comments area to others that want to debate the issues or offer their own thoughts as well.

My sub-title makes the better point here, which is "be prepared for a long line of disappointments if they win" (should Democrats win control of either chamber of the Congress).  Why do I say that?  Because that is pretty much exactly what will happen.

Voters that expect action from the Democrats are going to be disappointed.  There's not going to be an impeachment of George W. Bush, there is not going to be an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, nor even really an effective plan or exit strategy for same.  There won't be a boost in the minimum wage, and there won't be tax increases on the rich or even windfall profit taxes on the big evil oil corporations.  Not going to happen.

Huh?  What??!  Not going to happen!?!  Surely I must be joking.  How could that be?

Simple -- there's not going to be an over whelming majority, and especially won't be a veto or filibuster proof majority should Democrats win.  If they win it's going to be in small measures.  Even the most optimistic polling data doesn't give them the blow out wins they'd need to take over complete control and effect their own policy without fear of veto or filibuster.

Thanks to the gang of 14 that helped eliminate Democrat filibusters for George W. Bush's judicial nominees, the rules were never changed in the Senate to restrict the use of filibusters.  Without having granted more power to the majority party, the rules still favor gridlock over progress in most cases.

George W. Bush, a president that has only sparingly used his veto pen up to this point could be about to make serious use of it in the coming two years.  His compatriots in the Congress are also quite familar with the much easier to play role of spoiler and minority party.  It's always easier as the party "out of power", and the Republicans will relish the role and make things as difficult as possible for the Democrats if put into that role.

So, in effect, the Democrats have built their platform upon guarantees of broken promises.  They are promising the world, but won't be able to deliver anything.  And what happens two years out when they've delivered nothing?  Uh, good question.  Will they have mustered additional support to widen a possible majority, or will they lose out in much the same way they're hoping their Republican opponents are now?  Most likely the latter.  They'll find that the Republicans come back strong promising to accomplish things and pointing at the failure of the Democrats to get things done.  They'll point out those failures endless times in political commercials.  They'll scare monger over the idea that ultra liberals will be in control and the morals of the country will be at stake, and they'll probably completely and totally energize that vast right wing base that they hope stays home dejected and sleeping during the coming election.

In anycase I hope voters are smart enough to see through the promises of impossible goals and dreams and realizes that anti-Bush sentiment won't get progress at all.  Far from it.  Best case it'll result in regression, rather than progression.  Especially in the areas of taxes.  On the plus side, those sun-setting tax-cuts are all going to come due for renewal during the coming years and Democrats will most definitely find themselves associated with tax increases if they don't continue the cuts and keep things at status quo.  What a nice little box they'll have painted themselves into.