"Detroit in 3"

I’ve been something of a baseball fan as long as I can remember.

No, it’ll make sense, give me a few sentences and I’ll catch up.

I was four when my St. Louis Cardinals won the World Series in 1982… don’t dwell too much on the math, I *PROMISE* I’ll later claim to be in my twenties… and it is one of the earliest memories I  have, certainly among the earliest to center on a television experience.

I remember being hosed by Denkinger in 1985.  I remember seeing a World Series game live in 1987 where Tom Lawless’ 1hundred-some-odd batting average got a clutch three run homer for us to win the game… one of the great sports thrills of my life.

So I was pretty keyed up when the Cardinals made it the World Series again in 2004 only to be beaten by… of all teams… the Red Sox.  You can only imagine how I felt when the birds struggled back just two seasons later and I heard the prognostication of a well known sports writer whose name now escapes me:

“Detroit in 3,” he said sarcastically.

Now, I know if you’ve followed me this far in this post you’re wondering what this has to do with anything.

I’ve been following the chances we had for winning back the Senate since early in 2009.  I really had great distaste for the idea of the Democratic party holding a Filibuster-proof majority in the Upper Chamber… a sad reality that came to pass when Arlen Specter Iscariot switched parties from not-really-all-that-Republican to suddenly-I-can-be-a-team-player Democrat.

And since the day that Arlen took his promised thirty pieces of silver (which turned out to be two pennies and a Showbiz Pizza game token) I have waited with baited breath to hear that one impossible thing:  That revenge… however impossilby won… is ours.  That we have regained the chamber we never should have lost, and certainly that the majority of this country never intended for us not to have a voice in.

Now most political analysts are willing to say it is indeed possible for Republicans to regain the House.  No doubt, winning a majority of Governor’s offices is possible, as we’d only have to go plus three in those.  But I see no reason to settle in the Senate.

For all the infighting we’ve witnessed… and waged… on this site, we should be more than proud of the slate of candidates we have assembled.  We have beaten the doddering and compromising Bob Bennet.  We conquered Will Forte’s soporific look-alike Trey Grayson and brought out the bright, commanding, insurgent Rand Paul, and the attempt to slander his political philosophy has not gotten his opponent within eight points.  I regret to inform Mr. Conway that it’s all downhill from here.  Sue Loewden will not destroy our Nevada chances rambling incoherently about chickens.  And while we have not won every battle… Stutzman fell to Coats, and DeVore to Fiorina, we have minted from these contests battle-toughened fighters with a win under their belt.  (Further, in Stutzman’s case, we’ve unearthed the next Congressman for the Indiana Third, a brighter, younger, fresher Conservative than Mark Souder was… and evidence indicates a more principled alternative as well.)

And it’s partially that very issue… the battle challenges… that inspired me to post this diary tonight.  Our nominee in California earlier today retweeted Chuck Todd in saying that “Barbara Boxer has a fight on her hands.”  That is why we will win this war.  In the Democratic hotbeds of Washington, of Wisconsin, and of California, they never foresaw that this would be a fight.  They never imagined they’d have anything to defend.  These people are so delusional that they honestly convinced themselves their states were liberal enough and their mandate strong enough that they could act against their constituents’ issues and ignore their constituents’ plights and somehow still retain their electability.

For all that has been made of the mountain to climb, people seem to forget we are surging, and we’ve got the gear.  The wind is at our back and we know the path.  We’ve done this before!  And we’ve never faced a squadron of less charismatic candidates who have fooled themselves into thinking they’re safe because their voters have no choice.

In 2004, Barbara Boxer won more popular votes than any person has outside of a Presidential election.  And she forgot the reality of the nature of that particular contest and let it convince her that people actually like her.   They don’t like her.  Politically inclined people don’t go to the polls to leave their ballot blank.  But Boxer was riding a rare wave of popularity, and the Republican Party in California had nominated an underfinanced bus token to run against her.  On paper, a former state Secretary of State sounds like an impressive opponent, but he never had the money to run AN ad.  Opposing the unpopular policies of George W. Bush (especially in California) how *COULD* she lose?

But she’s not facing Bill Holt anymore.  Patty Murray isn’t running against George Nethercutt with an unpopular opponent President at the top of her opponent’s ticket.  The unpopular President is on her side now, and he stopped in town to raise money for her when she had no opponent, and I feel we should thank him.

In 2006, the only fight result I was happy with was in the World Series.  You know, the powerful, insurgent, amazing Detroit Tigers fell to the underdog, motley crew Cardinals in six games.

I hope, in the Motor City and the Gateway City both, and all points between or surrounding, we find the 2010 result even more to our liking.