I'm tired and just hoping it will be over soon. The excitement part is only in cheking for the results on your site to see how we are doing and what Senator I can write to make a difference between now and then.  

It's a midterm.  Only the bloggers and the real hardcore political junkies are seeing the pattern here.  For the rank and file, all politics are local, and they vote for the candidate that they're familiar with.  We should be thankful.  If it was more high profile, other business interests and evangelicals might pour more of their resources into using economic and spiritual blackmail on the church-on-Sunday Republicans to draw them out.

We have to make sure we're motivating turnout on our side, even if it's quietly.  You'll see; it WILL get exciting come mid-October.

First comment here, long time lurker.

I don't think so.

I'm up to my neck in the minutiae of a countywide campaign I've been working on for two years. Too much to do and not enough time to do it. I love it when a plan comes together.

Contributions come in, money gets spent. We dropped a massive in-house constructed mailing yesterday morning. It's hitting all over today and the buzz is buzzing.

Go, help someone, anyone, who's running for office this cycle. If you're not doing so you're just occupying space and wasting bandwidth here.

FWIW, I've given even MORE money this cycle than I did in '04; I've been to organizing meetings -- my husband just last month became our town's Democratic precinct captain -- and pounded the pavement during the Newark mayoral campaign in the spring; I've been to rallies; we're hosting a house party next month...I'm way more activated, but a lot more worried, this time around, because I really do think we are near a tipping point that the country won't recover from and I'm sick at the thought we won't make the gains we need to (blame squarely on the MSM, by the way, for their incessant pro-Republican soul crushing), which then triples my commitment. So I would call it grim determination rather than excitement, but is it ever intense.

Perhaps it has something to do with the interminable primary season, and the candidacies of Cuellar and Hackett and Cegelis and (last but so very much not least) Lieberman which so engaged the emotions of (a good many parts of) the sphere.

Perhaps it's because the Dems leading the charge, whatever their merits in close conclave, are by and large pretty dismally uninspiring on TV.

Perhaps - and this would be my hope - lefties realize that a Dem-controlled 110th House will be no rest cure.

Unless the GOP decide to implode or fight a civil war - or just lose confidence and becoming generally ineffectual. Not very likely, I'd suggest.

But even before then, there's the tricky matter of dividing up the victors' spoils: the assumption that ranking members will sliding across to chairmen's seats, and the leadership all move up one rung may well not quite work out.

So many reasons not to get excited too early...

Don't get faint of heart, Chris, as the battle is about to be joined!  Once Congress adjourns, things will heat up.  We're going to be hit and hit hard (by their ads).  But we're ready, we have the candidates, we have not as much money as they but enough, the national mood is with us, and we have to keep in mind what we are fighting for.  If they could do it in 1994, we can do it now.

    We have a tight race for governor and a shot at one congressional pickup but I really don't see any excitement. There are very few lawn signs, bumper stickers or public rallies for either side. Dick DeVos(R-Amway) started running ads on TV last Winter and has kept the airways filled ever since (his family has billions). Perhaps people are already tired of the campaigns since this one started so early. There are three gubernatorial debates between now and Nov so maybe that will perk things up.  

The problem is that even if we win (meaning the House and the Senate), we still have an uphill climb through the right-wing dominated media and through the existing complacent Dems in Congress to make the changes that need to be made to restore the USA to health (i.e. scorched-earth the entire executive branch, seizing the assets of  Halliburton and other war profiteers, etc).

2004 had more potential for actually fixing stuff in the short term. 2006 is about long-term change. (Ultimately, we may be better off that we lost in 2004, because it was a big wake up call to a lot of us that something was horribly, horribly wrong, but in the short term we got Scalito, more torture, and probably nuking Iran.)

It's not going to be easy, no matter what happens. And that is obvious to everyone, or should be. We're still in a hole, no matter what. We need to start filling it, and this is only the first electoral step in a very long haul.

I think part of it may be some of the letdown after the Lamont win. The wind got taken out of the sails pretty quickly due to Lieberman's decision to run as an independent. That reinforced the sense I have, anyway, of  what an uphill battle all of this is all the time. 1 step forward, 3 steps backs is how it feels.

In addition, I also suffer from the fear that if we do take back control of congress, our Democratic leaders won't rise to the occasion. I hope I'm wrong. But I want hearings. I want there to be repercussions for these republicans. I want the message to be very clear that getting a position in government does not render people immune from responsibility for their actions.

I absolutely do not want our leadership to roll over and play nice. I don't want them to "look ahead" without taking a hard look at what all has gone down these last 5 years.

But I don't have a strong sense that anything like that will happen.

Sigh.

And I agree also with the poster above that the campaign has not yet been fully joined.

I agree. I have recently had a fall out with politics and have not been as active as I should be. But, the problem is that nobody is excited especially here in Wisconsin. The Doyle campaign is basically asleep except for the airwaves. I live in the heart of liberal Milwaukee and there are no yard signs, no canvassing, no sign of an election at all. It is very odd. The only thing that is getting people pumped is the Fair Wisconsin Campaign(Vote NO on amendment to ban civil unions) other than that the activist landscape is loooking empty. The progressive movement is basically non-existent. The only guy I wanted to win this fall got convicted of voting twice in 04. Maybe it is just me not being excited but things look dismal at best.

I agree with Chris, I just don't feel the "rush" of things coming together.

For me it is mostly local, it was easy getting excited for the "national" primaries (Ciro, Busby, Lieberman) but now that they are over it is time to get down to the local races. Lynch is cruising to re-election, but he isn't particularly inspiring; I had real high hopes for Hodes here in NH-02 but the polling has had him a steady distance back and there seems to be zero advertising/bumper stickers/signs locally to show a base of support here in the Upper Valley (which should be one of his strongest regions)and that is making me doubt our chances.

I hope that as I get more involved with the local campaign that feeling will turn around. In the meantime I remain cautiously optimistic for the national picture.

That's a tough one. Yes, it is a midterm election, but it's high profile as midterms go--the Congress hangs in the balance, and people see this as a referendum on an extremely controversial president.

But I agree that there's not much buzz. There's no "Contract with America" or any unifying theme or story about the campaign. And I think it's probably because the party leaders in DC couldn't figure anything out. Let's face it, most our current leadership isn't very good at telling stories, coming up with good frames, and connecting with normal people. Plus, the DNC is (or was) at ware with the DCCC, so that would undermine any movement toward a unifying message.

I think we'll win this November, and I'm more optimistic than Chris, even though I am in the under 40 set. But, even though we have some great candidates out there, I think we'll win largely because of what the Repugs screwed up, not what the Democrats did. Their implosion is getting pretty amazing, and it's a shame the national party couldn't capitalize on that in a big way.

I was taking a snooze waiting for something to happen.  Did you ask me something?

I feel the same, although I should disclaim that I took myself out of the 24-hour news/blogging cycle for a month to start a new business, so maybe I'm missing something.

However, having "dried out" from the junk, I do have to say I'm not inclined to get back on it. The story is the same, and even though I'm a sometime-effective party activist, I agree with the majority of Americans that the Democrats don't have any answers to our problems.

Part of that is a deep realization of how long it will take to work some things out, but another part is that there's a huge vaccum of leadership and vision at the moment.

Congressional elections are more "local" in character, but they're not about local issues (where I think everyone has something they can sink their teeth into). Our national issues are kind of a stagnant mass, and until some new ideas and energy emerge there it's unlikely that this sensation will change.

It's the calm before the storm.

Well, I'm just dispirited and not confident. Maybe it's me, but the Republicans' Party has a lot of money and the bloody shirt that is September 11 and nationalism is still not worn through, I fear. We may, indeed, be just that stupid. Or, just stupid enough. Plus, I live in Virginia, and this is the third campaign year in a row. The Tim Kaine victory was great, and proves that we Democrats can do something right, the year before, not so much, when I dug deep in my pockets for Kerry. The only good news is that Allen has fallen so far hanging onto his seat will  be a challenge,  but I've been watching him for twenty years or so and he's got a reservoir of crass personal ambition that drowns every other part of his personality. I at least hope he's never going to get a shot at the White House.

Basically, been down so long flat's looking like up to me. I'll believe we win when it happens.

Those of us who follow politics day to day can find our senses dulled, and imagine that our own lack of excitement is somehow indicative of the mood of the larger public. Following the news cycle day after day, week after week, can numb us to the shifts in public opinion that will determine the election.

James Carville once said of political professionals that when we've heard a message a hundred times, maybe one percent of the voters have heard it once.

Off the subject but how do you put links in comments or diares?

I detect little voter interest.  The races in Tampa exist almost soley on television.  I can count on one hand the number of bumber stickers I have seen.

I actually think the Harris debacle may be turning everyone off of politics this cycle.  Her campaign has made the entire political process seem a charade.

There is a tough House race to the South in Sarasota to succeed Harris - its one that we may actually win.  But it is hard to say there is great excitement about it...

We need to win at least one house of Congress NOW - THIS YEAR.  No more moral victories.  2008 will be a completely different ball of wax.  Bush won't be nearly the issue he is this election and, frankly, Bush is a huge gift for us right now.

If we can't win either houses of congress this time, and I see one post telling us what a great step forward this was, I am going to scream.  We have to get it done, this time. I'm sick of moral victories.  This is a midterm election with all branches of govt belonging to the Reps who are scandal-ridden, divided, deeply unpopular and sunk by a disastrous war.  If we can't win something this time, we need to go back to the drawing board.

 Here in Maryland it's pretty lively, at least. :)

 But to enliven things nationwide, here's a suggestion:

How about this soundbite from EVERY Democrat over the next seven weeks:

 "Bush is as credible on Iran as he was on Iraq."

 I don't see any way a Republican can effectively respond to that without either (a) admitting Iraq was a lie or (b) admitting an Iran invasion would be a disaster.

 It reminds people of Iraq, the Republicans' worst albatross, and ties it into their next big gift to us.

 And the best part is that the Democrats wouldn't have to directly call Bush a liar, which for some mysterious reason they seem to be pathologically terrified of doing...

We're losing a two term Repub Congressman (Beauprez) who is about to get trounced in the governor's race.  Our James Dobson district in Colorado Springs has turned into a barely possible D pickup, we may well knock off Marilyn Musgrave AND will likely pickup CD7 that was abandoned by Beauprez.

In addition we now have Colorado Confidential that is now ripping the evil Republican 527 called the Trailhead Group into shreds and Colorado Media Matters is keeping our MSM honest.

There are tons of yard signs and bumper stickers out all over the Dennver metro area -- and even around the state.
In my little pivotal statehouse district, we're starting to get bunches of new volunteers and money is coming in from around the country.

Contrary to Chris's reasoned projections, I think November 8 will be a seriously nice day!

Love ya Chris but yer off your rocker on this one.

If you are bored then come up to NY-20. There is too much work to do to have time to be bored.

The race is tight and the opposition is mean, nasty, and ugly. They smear and slime anything and everybody.

Come on up. We could use as many helping hands as we can get! I guarentee you won't be bored.

Good Lord!  This is like the beer commercials with sharks swimming around the guy floating on water and the guy talking about nothing exciting ever happening.

With the exception of a few scandals in Virginia and Tennessee, there has been basically no real movement among Democratic Senate targets in months.

Have you missed the fun and games in Montana?  The collapse of Casey in Pennsylvania, who is doing his best to lose to a real nutcase?  The manufactured scandal in New Jersey?  

Connecticut is moving in the right direction now.  There was one stray and unlikely report of movement even in Texas.  Ohio and Missouri promise to be suspenseful to the end.

Don't confuse fatigue for lack of excitement.

Katherine Harris offers little these days but George Allen is filling in quite nicely.  How many elections had such spectacles?

It's a wonderful year.  

Keep up the good work and keep a bit of wonder.  

Best,  Terry

Gotta agree with Chris - as a Philly local, there's a real lack of excitement in general, at least in the progressive community to which Chris and I belong.  And there's one reason:

Bob Casey.

I like it.  I think it's a more realistic picture of our participant democracy.  This is not going to be over in November.  We are in for a marathon, not a sprint.  

And people are working and contributing money.  When I was out canvassing two weeks ago for the D's in my precinct, they were determined and knowledgeable and they had no need to talk about it.  Just a mutual sense of doing our parts.  

Maybe the fact that it seems quiet isn't such a bad thing for our side.  I have the feeling that our secret weapon is that Democrats are far more motivated at the moment and are likely to show up and vote in November.  I just don't think Rove is going to get his base out there this time around.

The battle is not yet joined.   As unbelievable as it may sound, many voters only dimly aware that there is an election coming up.  Peak but don't peak too soon.  If it's this quiet in another three weeks, then perhaps there is cause for concern.  But even casual Democrats I talk to are looking forward to voting against Bush somewhere on the ballot even if they aren't vocal, visible, working on a campaign, etc.

Let's say your team misses the playoffs. You can still have rooting interest in the postseason, that a team(s) you despise will lose. And that can be extremely satisfying as it happens, but hardly the same as your team going all the way, or threatening to.

We are rooting more for Republicans to fail, than for Democrats to win. That's my sense and no one can convince me otherwise. There's no obvious agenda to embrace should we take control, no party theme to get behind during the campaign. Plus it's a hang on baby type of feeling, no recent implosions from Bush to cause a slide in the polls, and glee on the progressive sites.

I prioritize governorships so in that regard the midterm year is more interesting by definition, since roughly 2/3 are decided.

I think it's the nature of the beast.  There are hundreds of races.  It's like watching a play with a hundred narratives.  You can't engage with the characters.  I like Hackett, but Victoria Wulsin is even more impressive.  Harvard, M.D., spends years in Africa studying public health.  Think about what that means for a young woman.  Or Coleen.  Do you remember her speaking out, almost alone at the time?  Do you remember how overwhelmed we were by her.  People were naming babies after her.  Or Gary Trauner actually pounding the pavement for months, alone.   What persistence in the face of daily small slights and difficulties. What guts.  What courage.  Sure it takes guts to speak out like Hackett did, but I've done sales; it wears on your soul to face door after door.  

Why were we excited about Lamont?  Because he was our first love this season.  Because we couldn't believe that the mighty could actually fall.  We still don't believe it.  But we have remarkably brave and intelligent people out there, uncorrupted, and if we're lucky, incorruptible.  

But we have to know that if we win, no matter how big the win, the fight is still huge to move America in the direction we want to go; the direction we have to go.  

I think that the small activist sector is alternately excited, worried, and burnt-out.

But as for the general population... well, around here, I don't see many voters who are excited over this election at all. What they are is pissed off. They hate Bush, they hate the war, they hate the economy, they think Congress is a bunch of useless slackers, and no one on either side cares much about traditional battleground issues like abortion and gay marriage right now. They're just frustrated and mad. Democrats are going "Get rid of all those bastards, but it's not going to matter till '08 anyway." Republicans are going "Congress sucks and I'm going to vote for a Democrat just to teach them a lesson." Nobody's got that hopeful "The world might be going to be better soon!" feeling that many of us had during 2004 (I feel depressed just thinking about it now...) Everyone's just mad as hell and ready to take revenge on their local guy because there's no one else they can reach.

So, that's really not what I'd call excitement, and I doubt it's really going to help Democrats much in the long run, but I think Republicans are going to be in a world of hurt this November, and that's exciting to ME, at least. :-)

In 2004 there was a big debate about the Iraq war that made things interesting.  People doing various things that doesn't involve an issue just isn't interesting because it is more like watching a movie.  No matter what happens none of this so far gives a feeling like it will have any effect on me.

Its more like watching a movie than watching a play where the people are right there and you could be affected by their actions.

Harold Ford, Jr preceded his opponent last night on Lawrence Kudlow's CNBC program. The host read from "clips," which emphasized Ford as too liberal for and out of sync with Tennessee. Ford had ample opportunity to rebut the charges. Good lord, the opposition to Ford even labels him a "celebrity;" so who are the starry dems to whom Harold is being likened?

When Corker had his say, Kudlow corrected some of his insinuations, and otherwise headed off disparaging remarks.

Many thanks to Lawrence Kudlow for giving prime time exposure to Ford's campaign!

Campaigns that revolve around single personalities, or a contrast of two personalities, are easier to get excited about.  Hackett v Schmidt.  Lieberman v Lamont.  Bush v Kerry.  Dean v Clark.  When there's just one race at a time, and just two personalities, it's much much easier to grasp.  There's round characters to work with.  Now, there's 50 simultaneous races, mostly it's just two faceless abstract parties confronting each other, there's few larger-than-life characters on the D side anyway, and it feels abstract.  You can fall in love with Hackett, but who is Patricia Madrid to us when there's fifty Dem challengers and 50 R incumbents?  There's no way to get personal.

The exceptions on this thread have been the people who are strongly involved in single campaigns.  They feel energized and passionate, cause they have round personalities to love and hate.   A generalist like you, Chris, is stuck with abstract parties and polling numbers.  No wonder you're feeling dulled.

As an example, consider Victoria Wulsin.  As you said in another post, she's the kind of candidate you could fall in love with.  I didn't even know those things about her until just now though; for almost all people and almost all candidates, they're just names and numbers.  Victoria Wulsin is just a seat we can win, not a human that I want to be in Congress.  That's the difference here.