This column is being written in advance of the elections on Tuesday, but there is no serious doubt among observers that the Democrats will win -- increasing their margins in both Houses of Congress, and among the governorships as well, and capturing the presidency. Any other result would be an earthshaking development, but nobody is holding their breath.
But the additions to the Democratic margins in the House and Senate are not likely to alter the balance of forces in either body. Even if they succeed in increasing their margin in the Senate to 60, which is unlikely, that body will remain resistant to total Democratic control. A 60-vote majority would make it theoretically possible for the Democrats to keep Senate Republicans from blocking measures they desire (since it could prevent filibusters), but in any group of 60 politicians there are almost always bound to be one or two who will go off the reservation at any key moment. The same is true of the Republicans, of course: if they have only 41, there is always the danger that one will defect and give the Democrats that critical 60th vote. But the point remains: irresistible Democratic control of the Senate will remain unlikely at best.
The House of Representatives is, of course, another matter. The Democrats already have a fairly comfortable majority there, however, and increasing it a bit will simply nail down their dominance.
Far more consequential will be the election of a Democratic president, to replace George W. Bush. President Obama will be the nation's undisputed leader, with vast appointive powers to enforce his will. And the new Congress will, of course, be eager to follow his lead, especially in the early going. With three Supreme Court seats likely to become vacant in the near future, that immensely influential body also seems likely to fall under total Democratic sway.
Where this sea change in the nation's political control will take us remains to be seen. In the Senate, Obama has tended to go along with the Democratic majority -- which is to say, to vote along liberal lines. But if he has had any impulse to kick over the traces and sponsor far-left legislation, he has concealed it well. And during the campaign he stayed generally short of the sort of redistributionist rhetoric associated with the left, though one or two other Democratic spokesmen allowed themselves to sound tempted by it.
William Rusher is a Distinguished Fellow of the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy and author of How to Win Arguments .
Be the first to read William Rusher's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
Clinton Loses The Washington Post: "Use of Private E-mail Shows Poor Regard For Public Trust" | Katie Pavlich
WH Counsel's Office: Wait, Hillary Used Her Personal Email While She Was Secretary Of State? | Matt Vespa