A BRIEF LOOK BACK. I’ll be writing about this at greater length in a piece for New York Times Select coming out tomorrow, but with Election 2006 just a week away and the narratives already emerging about its significance, I though we ought to pause to first clarify what happened two years ago, in 2004.

First, the basic recap:

  • Presidency. A 3-point national bump for Bush over 2000, the smallest gain for an re-elected president since McKinley‘s 1900 re-election. Just three states switched, the fewest since George Washington ran the table the second time, in 1792, prior to popular voting. Because Bush’s gain of New Mexico (five electors) was essentially negated by his loss of New Hampshire (four), the president picked up 3 points plus Iowa.
  • Congress. Three net House seats for GOP, which were more than accounted for by the re-redistricting of Texas (four seats directly plus one party switch). Net of four senate seats for the GOP, arguably their biggest achievement, but one that, again, was more than accounted for by the five southern Democratic retirements.
  • Governors. A push: Democrats picked up New Hampshire and Montana, GOP gained Indiana and Missouri, the rest did not switch control.
  • State legislatures: Democrats gained about 60 seats nationally, and captured eight new chamber majorities to just four for the Republicans.

    So, for the GOP victory can be summarized as 3 points plus Iowa in the presidential contest, 3 House seats, 4 senators, no governors, and losses in the state legislatures. And this, despite the fact that the GOP had control over the entire national governing apparatus, and Bush was the incumbent, with all the advantages (bully pulpit and a two-year head start in building his field campaign over John Kerry) thereunto pertaining. Oh, and this is not to mention, as the national media chorus all seems to agree, that the Republicans are better strategically, tactically, and rhetorically; have better, leaner, meaner consultants and candidates with a tougher, clearer message; and the conservative movement has a more developed media echo chamber, think tank infrastructure, and field campaign apparatus.

    The truth is 2004 was a fizzle, not a boom. Democrats didn’t win, to be sure, but should the GOP really be rejoicing given how little they were able to budge the needle? Karl Rove claims that 2004 was just the next stage in a “rolling realignment.” Maybe. But that rock seems to have rolled as far up the hill (or Hill) as possible, and is soon headed in the other direction.

    Still, watch for the Democrats to win just as many Senate seats, far more House seats, more governors, and continue their progress in the state legislatures next week — and it still will be depicted as the Democrats somehow having come up short.

    –Tom Schaller

    • Sam Rosenfeld, a former web editor for the Prospect, is visiting assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University, beginning in September.