I'm with Timber Loftis in wanting the President and the control of Congress controlled by different parties. It seems to me that the best overall legislation comes in that situation. When either party controls both then they tend to run off with their "pet" theory of what would make America better forgetting who is going to pay for it or if the majority of people would even approve of it. That's why I was a campaign worker for Republican canidates for govenor in Texas in the late 60's and a McGovern worker in '72 at Texas A&M.
I am afraid that Bush will perceive this as a mandate to invade Iraq and not a reflection on American solidarity in the face of terrorism or people voting based on the candidates merits. (I is statistically possible that all the Republican candidates were the better ones.
)