Based on letters and emails I receive, many readers of this column and most female readers tell me their least favorite columns are the ones I write about politics. I think there are a couple of reasons for that. Except for political junkies, most people just aren't that interested in politics. They tend to see it as a system that has been so corrupted by money, power, and ego that they would rather just not think about it. The problem with not thinking about it is that, like it or not, politics and politicians control or, at least, influence most of the things that we encounter in our daily lives, from birth to death and most everything in between. It's one of those necessary evils we should take an active interest in because if we don't control it, it will control us.

 

I imagine the other reason people aren't crazy about my political columns has to do with my own personal political persuasion. I'm a Democrat in one of the reddest states on the map (Red in terms of politics, not Husker football). So my opinions and take on all things political runs against the grain of a vast number of people living in this area. I understand and accept that. That's who I am and that's how I was raised. I was raised in the South when that area of the country was a bastion for Democrats. In fact, my entire family was what are called "yellow dog" Democrats. They voted a straight Democratic ticket regardless of who the candidates were. Although I've never gone that far, I certainly find I have more in common with the moderate wing of the Democratic Party than I do the Republican Party. I'm not a tree hugger or an environmentalist, or a wild-eyed liberal and neither are most Democrats, although the Republicans have been pretty successful as characterizing all Democrats as such. I certainly don't view most Republicans as right-wing reactionaries either. The fact is, most Democrats and most Republicans are much closer to the center than not.

 

In nine days, many of us will be participating in an election that some are describing in historical terms. The Republicans have controlled both houses of Congress for 12 years, since the voter revolution of 1994. They have controlled both the Executive and Legislative branches for the past six years. Whether they have taken this country in the right direction or not will be decided on the first Tuesday in November. The most recent polls indicate that a majority of Americans think they haven't. According to the Oct. 30 issue of Newsweek magazine, people likely to vote in the upcoming elections say that Democrats are better able to bring about the changes the country needs by a 50 percent to 30 percent margin, that Democrats are better able to manage the government well by 47 percent to 31 percent and that they are better able to govern honestly by 39 percent to 27 percent. These thoughts are reflected in the political races that will end on Election Day. According to pollster.com, Democrats lead in the Governor races, 27 to 21 with 2 in the toss-up category.

They lead in the house races 219 to194 with 22 rated toss-ups, and there is a dead heat in the Senate races, 48 to 48 with four toss-ups. Senator Nelson predicted the other night that he saw the Senate ending up 51 Republicans to 49 Democrats. That is exactly in line with pollster.com which has the Republican candidate leading, but within the margin of error, in three of the four toss-up contests.

 

If the polls are accurate and we won't know that until after the election, the Democrats are likely to retake the House of Representatives and could gain control of the Senate as well. Even if they just gain control of one of the two houses, it will make for a marked departure in the way our government has conducted the peoples business over the past six years. The President has been able to proceed with every plan he's had with virtually no opposition or serious questioning at all because his party controlled not only the Presidency but both houses of Congress as well. There have been no checks and balances, as our forefathers desired. The founders of this Democracy constructed the three branches of government; the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial to over-see each other, to provide for checks and balances and to essentially keep each other honest. Much of this goes away when one party controls everything. As we have watched the decision-making process over the past six years, most people are in agreement that several things went bad and several things weren't good ideas to begin with, but there was no loyal opposition because the loyal opposition didn't have enough votes to change the course of anything the President wanted to do. Consequently, on the eve of a national election, it appears the people are ready for a change.

 

Some people erroneously believe that when the legislative and executive branches are controlled by different parties, the end result is gridlock. It's certainly true that it becomes tougher to get everything you want passed, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, I don't look at it as gridlock at all. What both the executive and legislative branches of government will have to do is compromise their positions a little to get at least some of what they want. And whenever people compromise, they move closer to the middle and the middle is where most of the people are.

 

If compromise means gridlock, then gridlock is good.

 

*

 

I had the pleasure of introducing Sen. Nelson at the rally held for him last Tuesday evening at the Republican River Valley Event Center. A nice crowd of area residents turned out to meet and greet him. I'm supposing that most of you aren't aware that the Senator is now a recording artist. Before I introduced him, I played a CD of the song "Western Town" he recorded a few months ago. When the song was over, the crowd responded with a standing ovation.

 

*

I'm having dinner and drinks tonight with a woman originally from Oberlin. Guess I'm just a fool for Oberlin girls.