´óÏó´«Ã½

´óÏó´«Ã½ HomeExplore the ´óÏó´«Ã½
This page has been archived and is no longer updated. Find out more about page archiving.

The Reporters: US mid-terms

All entries by this reporter: Katty Kay

Rummy's firing squad


If had been "let go" a few months ago, would the Republicans be facing such a desolate political landscape today?

That's the question being asked by some bitter party stalwarts who appear to believe the Senate, at least, would still be theirs if Rummy had gone in time for the Republicans to make political capital from the move.

But others disagree (by the way, I think we're going to see a lot of this over the next two years: disagreement amongst Republicans, amongst Democrats, between the two parties and between Congress and the White House).

Look at the exit polls. Yes, Iraq was a big factor, but so was corruption.

Conservatives were so fed up with the ethics of the party leadership that even putting Mr Rumsfeld up against a firing squad might not have changed their actions.

These elections have revealed chasms in both parties - now the battle begins for who controls the centre ground. It's going to be a fascinating two years - not pretty, but fascinating.

Premature celebration?


This is starting to feel eerily familiar. I remember standing on a roof overlooking the White House on election night in 2004. My phone kept ringing from giddy Democrats: "We're ahead, even in Virginia, it's ours."

A few moments ago, I bumped into one of them in the reception of our Washington bureau. He flashed out his BlackBerry: "Look at this, we're ahead, even in Virginia, it's ours."

We should have all realised there was something odd about those polls in 2004 when the Democrats believed conservative Virginia had voted for John Kerry.

Should we be as sceptical tonight? It's been six dismal years for the Democrats. They are desperate to get back into power. Are they so desperate they'll break their own resolution and start celebrating prematurely?

Getting the megaphone back


Republicans are already giving their verdict: the is helping to turn the tide.

kerry2_ap203b.jpg"On Halloween, John Kerry reappears like a Democratic bogeyman, and potentially scares swing and GOP non-voters into showing up at the polls on Tuesday" - that was the message in my inbox this morning from one Republican pollster.

Republicans recognise that the Democrats "won" October, as they put it.

The did have a serious impact - not because it depressed enthusiasm among conservatives (there is little polling evidence to show that party stalwarts decided to stay home as a direct consequence of Mr Foley's sexual proclivities) but rather because it deprived the Republicans of what political operatives call the megaphone.

Well, in the last 48 hours the Republicans feel they have got the megaphone back.

Going on the offensive on Iraq was a risky strategy given the unpopularity of the war, but it's getting the party the lead on the front pages. It was the first time in a month that the GOP message was starting to break through.

Mr Bush may be unpopular but his stump speeches still get airtime.

Then along comes Mr Kerry with his botched joke (You can hear it here) and Mr Bush is relishing the chance to relive his 2004 victory.

Republicans are hoping that if nothing else Mr Kerry's remarks will remind those who voted for Mr Bush in 2004 why they didn't support the Democrats, while also raising questions about whether a Democrat can be trusted to support the troops at war.

Mr Kerry made a mistake (not the first of his political career) and all the Democrats want to do now is push him off a cliff, or, far more importantly, out of the headlines. Iraq is their big trump card.

The feeling is that if the senator had made a joke about anything but Iraq it wouldn't be so bad.

This is unlikely to change the minds of any Democrats, or even those independents for whom hatred of Bush is the prime motivator, but at the very least it knocks the Dems off message for a day or two.

And with only six precious days to go, that's long enough.

Which way next?


Two weeks to go and Washington has election fever. Party strategists, pollsters and journalists are thinking of nothing else.

bush_helicopter_ap.jpgThe world is about to change. Or is it?

I'm starting to get the depressing feeling these much-heralded elections might not change very much at all here in the city of political stagnation.

Democrats can taste victory and are thrilled at the prospect of winning something, anything, after so many years out of power. Desperate to woo moderate voters they promise, brows furrowed with earnest sincerity, that if they win they will not spend the next two years investigating the Bush administration.

Whether those moderates can keep a lid on the likes of , who has already suggested impeachment hearings for the president and would become head of the if the Democrats win, is unclear. The Republicans have certainly used the spectre of endless investigations for their own political means during this campaign.

But that's not what depresses me most. No, it's the lack of ideas and leadership which is really dispiriting this election season.

The Republicans are stuck in the gloom of Iraq and tumbling poll numbers. Policy ideas? You must be joking. It's all they can do to keep off the front pages.

Given the GOP doldrums, you'd think the Democrats could seize on this vacuum of ideas and come up with some eye-catching proposals of their own. I'm afraid not. The Democratic party is an ideas-free zone at the moment. Plenty of criticism, not much originality.

On both sides it's as if the paralysis caused by Iraq has infected all other areas of political life.

If the Democrats win big, the impeachment-wing of the party will feel emboldened. The result: lots of investigation, not much legislation. If the result is close neither side will have the clout to enact radical change. The result: lots of in-fighting, not much law-making.

The time is ripe for a real leader to emerge. For the past couple of weeks I've been asking people in both parties whether they can see any such figure. Is there someone new out there, someone we perhaps haven't heard of yet, who could pull the country out of logjam? So far I've only received sad shakes. No, no-one they can think of.

This 109th Congress has been aptly described as the "" Congress. Its successor could well be the do-less-than-nothing Congress.

Southern comfort?


Democrats are keeping a close watch on how they play in the South next month, looking for signs the political landscape there could be shifting in their favour. They have been out of favour in the South for ages and sense they could be making inroads into this Republican territory.

ford_ad_ap203b.jpgFirst on the Democrats' list of hopefuls is , running for the US Senate in Tennessee. His bid is historic because he could become the first black senator elected from the South. He's personable, moderate and tough on defence, which is essential to winning high-testosterone Southern votes.

But what's really getting Democratic strategists excited about Mr Ford is the nature of his campaign. He is playing the religion card with ease and that's something Democrats realise they have to learn to do to poll well with Southerners. He is running a TV ad recorded in a church and handing out photo business cards with the 10 Commandments printed on the back. OK, it's not very subtle but it does seem to be working.

Add two more close Senate races in Missouri - a border state ( and ) - and Virginia ( and ) and you have mutterings of a new sunny southern landscape.

Less high-profile but perhaps more significant are the gubernatorial races. If things go their way on election night, the Democrats could end up occupying governors’ mansions across the Southern states.

That said, even the most optimistic Democratic strategists concede this doesn't signify an automatic change in the South's political make-up for 2008.

America is still a few election cycles from the day when Southern states will once again back a Democrat who is not one of their own for the White House.

Not since John F Kennedy in 1960 has the party been able to send a Democrat to the White House who did not come from the South.

But could that change next cycle? As one seasoned party operative told me with a broad smile, "Of course if we get a Democratic governor in Arkansas and our candidate in '08, we could park Bill down there for six months. Now that wouldn't be so bad, would it?"

Eyes on 2008


2006? Forget it - 2008 is what major conservative donors are really worrying about, and they don't like the way their party is heading. Some of the biggest Republican donors are concerned that if the GOP loses the House in November it will boost chances of winning the presidential nomination in two years' time and they do not like the senator from Arizona.

Why not? Well, they just don't trust him on their core values, as one conservative Republican put it to me. Conservatives believe Mr McCain will say whatever is need to get elected but won't really represent their interests on social issues if he makes it to the White House.

But the same donors are in a fix right now. They can't see anyone else out there to get excited about.

romney_203ap.jpgThe man they like best is . His politics seem most similar to theirs but they are genuinely concerned that the party's base, the Christian evangelicals, will never vote for a Mormon, which Mr Romney is.

Back to the mid-terms. If the Republicans lose control on Capitol Hill, the hunch is that the party will be so desperate to get back into power that stalwart Republican voters will decide to back a winner even if he's not a true conservative, and that's John McCain. Remember the 2008 campaign begins on 8 November, so watch where those donors put their money.

About Katty Kay


I anchor the evening bulletins of ´óÏó´«Ã½ World News. We reach viewers around the world and an increasing share of US audiences on PBS and ´óÏó´«Ã½ America. The programme gives a half-hour window on the day's events from a global perspective.

I started my ´óÏó´«Ã½ career in Zimbabwe, reporting for the Africa service of ´óÏó´«Ã½ World Service radio, which gave me a sense of how important our language services are to the millions who rely on them around the globe. I went from Africa to London, where I got my first staff job with the corporation at Bush House in London. From there it was on to Japan as Tokyo correspondent.

After three years in Tokyo I landed in Washington where I have lived since 1996. I took some time out of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ to have children and to work for the Times of London in their Washington bureau. Print was a good education but I soon realised I prefer broadcasting. I returned to the ´óÏó´«Ã½ as an anchor in 2004.

I also appear regularly as a commentator on NBC's Sunday programmes, The Chris Matthews Show and Meet the Press, and on NPR's Diane Rehm show.

I was brought up in the Middle East as the daughter of a British diplomat. I studied French and Italian at Oxford, juggle journalism with raising my four children and spend what free time I have skiing and kite surfing.

The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not responsible for the content of external internet sites