Just read a piece by Bob Shrum, Democratic political consultant, titled, "The GOP decline starts Phase Two."  In it, he posits that the Republicans will be left holding the bag in 2010 and 2012 when "...the instant news cycle, which trumpeted the bad news, will turn around as the economy does."  He adds, "Increasingly, we'll hear that America's on the up, with the predictable tidal effects on our national politics."

For those of you not familiar with Shrum, he's been either THE primary "brain" or one of the primary "brains" behind the failed presidential campaigns of Dick Gephardt, Michael Dukakis, Bob Kerrey, Al Gore, and John Kerry.  That's right, he's blown more majors than Greg Norman.

I'm not sure there is anybody who has proven himself less adept at judging the political winds.  If his ear were any more tin, he'd be on Broadway in a revival of the Wizard of Oz.

How about this gem:  "...the economic news should—and I believe will—embolden Democrats to pass health care reform worthy of the name.  As the economy rises and mobocracy declines, Democrats will hold the high cards in the next congressional campaign.  They will be rewarded for the stimulus they passed and for a health care bill they enacted..."

And, if that's not enough, he continues, "In 2010 and 2012, Democrats will not only win elections; they will achieve a political transformation—the Obama era, with progressive values ascendant."

I'll have what he's having!

Apparently he's matriculated to the Obama school of it must be true if you say it enough.

Obama's had numerous questionable relationships over the past couple decades, but you have to give him credit for not putting the Shrum anvil around his neck.  Of course, there is always 2012.

Shrum, either conveniently or ignorantly, ignores a variety of factors that make his analysis dead wrong.

First, the electorate is not interested in the ascendancy of progressive values.  It was attracted to and sold a new form of politics—one that pushes ideology to the side in favor of bipartisanship.  It wanted practical solutions to real problems.  Unfortunately for Democratic candidates in 2010 and 2012, most now believe they were the victims of a bait-and-switch.  A choking amount of Big Government dogma has been substituted for "change you can count on."

Shrum also mysteriously avoids the public concern over growing deficits.  Ironically, it was he and his cronies who, in the 80's and 90's, brought the deficit into the American consciousness as a means of combating the successes of Republican supply side policies.  Of course, the deficits in those years were 2% to 6% of GDP (healthy, or at least not harmful, by most economists' standards), compared to the current and projected astronomical percentages (likely in the teens) that virtually all credible economists recognize as economically catastrophic.  How frightening for the Democrats to be in the cross hairs of a weapon of their own design?

In yet another miscalculation, Shrum incorrectly assesses the ultimate recovery and the public's likely reaction.  The "stimulus" is not and probably will not be seen as the catalyst for a return to prosperity.  On the contrary, it is largely recognized as a mis-managed, bloated, partisan, special-interest-laden piece of legislation that has prolonged the recession and limited the vitality of the eventual recovery. 

GDP expansion and job creation will almost definitely be constrained by the mountainous debt resulting from the Democrats' Big Government programs.  The lack of availability of jobs and likelihood of depressed wages will not sit well with the Democrats' core constituency, let alone the all-important Independent voters.  Most economists estimate it could be upwards of 4 to 5 years, or longer, before the unemployment rate has a chance to get back down to 5%...let alone the low 4's where it was not so long ago.  The fact that over 40% of Americans don't pay taxes won't benefit the Democrats if their policies result in monumental job losses and lower wages.

Again, the Dems will be bitten by rhetoric of their own creation.  Remember the "jobless recovery?"   That's the tag line they attached to Bush 43 when his administration was "only" able to create several million jobs after the shock of 9/11.  Obama would stand on his head to be able to claim such job growth.

Also, most don't recognize that the economy needs a net gain of 125,000 to 150,000 jobs per month (due to population growth and new household formation) in order for the unemployment rate to simply hold steady.  The dearth of pro-growth policies coupled with the crowding out of private capital by government borrowing to finance the debt make it quite difficult to project anything more than the most tepid of recoveries.

Moreover, although hard to estimate, we can't forget how much damage the Democratic brand has incurred and will incur from those pillars of statesmanship, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.  Some correctly argue that the Republicans are no shining light themselves, and as such, it will be a wash.  Not true; the Dems are in power, and the lion's share of the blame always goes to those who are.

None of the above even begins to consider that mid-term elections are notoriously difficult for the incumbent party, or other factors such as more than 60 Democrats in the House won in 2008 despite being in traditionally Republican districts.

Politicians and operatives never let facts get in the way of their efforts to obfuscate.

As the Tin Man said, "What have you learned, Dorothy?"

Apparently, not much insofar as Bob Shrum is concerned.