OK, well maybe more like the glass is half-full, instead of half-empty.
Now that the primaries are just about over (Lamantogne has not put Ayotte away yet, but it's so close there that it doesn't really matter), maybe things aren't as bad as we think they are.
At any rate - I think there's an opening to limit the damage (and maybe even pick off a few GOP seats in the process).
Now, I'm not saying this will happen - but it definitely can, depending on how President Obama, the Democratic leadership and our candidates actually engage.
First, there is precident for coming back from the midterm blues to actually gain seats: 1998 (for the Democrats) and 2002 (for the Republicans). In both cases, the period leading up to the post labor day campaign looked grim for the party in the White House. In both cases, once the voters engaged, the party in power actually gained seats. In 1998 it was because the Republicans looked too extreme and petty when they impeached President Clinton. In 2002 it was because the GOP was able to marshal fear of another terrorist attack to coalesce the voters around them.
I'm not saying we can gain seats - but we could - and we certainly don't have to lose control of either the House or the Senate. Why?
The Tea Party has caused a Republican Civil War. They're not used to it - and they certainly don't know how to react to it. But think about the GOP voters who supported Mike Castle tonight in Delaware. Will some relunctantly hold their noses and pull the lever for O'Donnell? Yes. But an equal - and possibly larger - amount will probably either support Coons or not vote at all.
It is an understatement to say there's something a little bit off about these Tea Party people. It's not just that their policies sound crazy, but something is just not right about them. Stick with Delaware for a moment. I just watched Christine O'Donnell look into the CNN camera, and in a remark about her admiration for Secretary of State Clinton, say "Hey Hillary, you go girl!" Not very prime time is she? These people aren't just extreme in their views on issues, they are also just plain weird. Weird doesn't do will in elections.
Extremes make voters uneasy, and sometimes angry. Assuming Ovide Lamontagne has won in NH, there are actually states the Democrats could take in the Senate - in fact several: New Hampshire, Kentucky, North Carolina, Florida (if Charlie Crist caucuses with the Democrats), Missouri and Alaska, just to name a few. That doesn't mean we will win them, or that it will be easy, but disgruntled Republican primary voters plus crazy fringe Republican nominee equals better shot for the Democrat. Always.
It also helps us hold on to Delaware, Colorado and Nevada.
Nationalized, the outing of the "new GOP" as crazy and racist (there's certainly plenty of ammunition) could mobilize minority, progressive and young voters and reignite the Obama coalition (and then some). I cannot imagine Carly Fiorina defeating Barbara Boxer as long as the Latino community is aware of how rediculously xenophobic the right wing has become.
Here's another one: The image of Carl Paladino as the standard bearer for the NY State Republican party should strike fear into every GOP congressional candidate on the ballot - incumbent or not. Crazy (and sleazy), Paladino could have an anti-coattail effect (often discussed, never seen), which will cause Republican support of down-ballot candidates to simply fall apart. How many house races is that worth?
How many "moderate" independents and Republicans do you know who shudder at the mere mention of the Tea Party? Those people should all be voting Democratic this fall.
It will take smart tactics and plenty of money. But done right, the world not only seems brighter through my rose-colored glasses. It's an infectious idea - winning - and one worth repeating. Yes. We. Can.