<http://schema.org/articleBody>
" The questions we should all be asking over the next seven days \u2014 and that I&amp;#039;ll be trying to answer right here \u2014 have to do with the nature of American politics for the next two years. As for 2010, it&amp;#039;s a given that Republicans will be making major gains in next Tuesday&amp;#039;s elections. It&amp;#039;s likely that they will regain control of the House, and it&amp;#039;s possible though less likely that they&amp;#039;ll regain the Senate, as well. President Obama will of course remain president. The likelihood, then, is that the legislature will be at least divided \u2014 and possibly unified \u2014 under the Republicans. No matter what, the White House will remain Democratic.  Three things are therefore clear. One, we are about to get an object lesson in the workings, or not-workings, of the bicameral Congress and the separation of powers. Two, Joe Lieberman is about to expand America&amp;#039;s vision, and test its tolerance, of bitterness and vainglory as motivating political influence. And three, Obama will be deploying a tool he has not often used to this point in is presidency: the veto pen. Looking at the Congress first, there has been much talk of a divided or narrowly Republican majority \u2014 one forcing a move towards centrism and bipartisanship. The New York Times has a typically sober and well-sourced piece today suggesting that it&amp;#039;s not likely.  Well, it isn&amp;#039;t just not likely. It&amp;#039;s simply not going to happen. The Republican Congressional leadership has made it abundantly clear that compromise is off the table. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has declared that the party&amp;#039;s chief goal is the prevention of a second Obama term (take your unemployment and shove it); House Republican Conference chairman Mike Pence has declared... well, read it for yourself. The bottom line is that 2011 and 2012 are going to make 2009 and 2010 look like a model of Kumbaya togetherness. Given that, the parties face differing goals. The Democrats, who despite their brave faces regarding the House must at this point simply be praying to retain control of the Senate, are desperate to retain the senatorial gavel. That will at least theoretically allow them to maintain momentum on their initiatives, and, again theoretically, give them the first move in any legislative chess match. I think they would be wise to make those first moves bold, and compromise down rather than up; but I won&amp;#039;t hold my breath. (They would be wiser still, given the past two years, to learn how to present Republican filibusters as inimical to the health of the nation and to democracy itself, but on that matter I&amp;#039;m already brain-dead from lack of oxygen. Still, every crisis is a potential opportunity.)  The Republicans are desperate, naturally, for control of both chambers, for despite their internal fractures (more on that later this week) they will present a united front in their legislative votes, and if they have a majority in Congress they will be chucking every piece of popular conservative legislature at the president that they can, and waiting to pounce on his every veto. Which leads to the ultimate lesson here. The next two years are going to be about one thing: blame. The GOP wants 2012 to be a year in which President Obama is blamed for political inaction. And the Democrats want it to be year in which the Republicans are blamed for the same thing. The arbiter will be the voters, and whether they think the president or the Congress is to blame for the morass. So prepare for two years of messaging over results. In art, truth is beauty. In politics? Spin. CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE CAMPAIGN COVERAGE ON THE POLITICS BLOG &amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;gt; "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a8723/blame-is-the-question-for-president-2012/>