It's not looking good for Republicans. At least that's what the mainstream media want you to believe.

It’s not looking good for Republicans.

At least that’s what the mainstream media want you to believe. Then again, haven’t they been saying that during the entire first year of Donald Trump’s presidency? Heck, weren’t they predicting the same gloom and doom for Republicans in 2016? Nonetheless, Democrats are feeling good right now and boasting of their prospects in the next two elections.

True, Democrats aren’t all talk. Billionaire Leftist Tom Steyer is putting his money where his mouth is. As Ben Kamisar writes in The Hill, “Steyer plans to channel the money in the House effort, which he said would total at least $30 million, toward his advocacy group, NextGen America. Steyer, who has also funded a multi-million dollar ad campaign calling for President Trump’s impeachment, wants to use the $30 million to boost turnout among millennial voters across 10 states.”

Notably, however, Steyer has reduced his Demo graft — having dumped $74 million into the 2014 midterm when voters gave Republicans control of the Senate and their largest House majority since 1928. He then spent $91 million for Democrats in the 2016 election, when Republicans held their majorities and elected Donald Trump. And his $20 million on a campaign to impeach Trump resulted in only 58 of 435 House members voting to impeach — that’s $344,827.59 per vote.

Clearly, leftist billionaire bucks alone aren’t enough to win elections. If it were, The Pantsuit would be president. What message are the Democrats going to run on? Taking back your tax cuts? Taking away your doctor? Sending companies back overseas? Dialing the Dow back to 17,000? Pushing for peace with the Islamic State? Let’s face it: Their platform is higher taxes, bigger government and more illegal immigration. And loathing Donald Trump.

Indeed, Nancy Pelosi scoffed, “In terms of the bonus that corporate America received versus the crumbs that they are giving workers to kind of put the schmooze on is so pathetic. It’s so pathetic.”

Other issues Democrats face include betting on history (the minority party usually picks up seats in mid-term elections), hoping that Americans will see the election as a referendum on the Trump presidency, and counting on favorable polls. But it’s what Democrats aren’t looking at that could upend their hopes of taking back the Congress.

As it stands, Democrats lack a compelling message for fixing any major problem facing the country. The utter dearth of any agenda is astounding.

Yes, they’ve embraced a cynical and convenient crusade against sexual harassment, but they’re otherwise a rudderless opposition party. In the end, Dan Balz of The Washington Post asks a critical question: “As they begin what amounts to a three-year campaign cycle of midterm elections followed by a critically important 2020 presidential race, will Democrats be forthright in assessing and dealing with their own vulnerabilities?”

Democrats are still a party in denial.

They don’t get Trump, they don’t get why he beat Hillary Clinton, and they don’t get the Republican Party. Former Democrat aide Brent Budowsky suggests, “On fundamental issues that motivate voters, the Trump Republicans include the entire upper strata of Republican leadership in the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives. There is barely a dime’s worth of difference between the policies of President Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Roy Moore of Alabama, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.)”

Not a dime’s worth of difference? This is why Democrats lose elections. They make assumptions about what Republicans and their voters think, they tell pollsters about their assumptions, and then they come up with every conspiracy theory they can think of to explain their losses. There’s a world of difference between Trump and Ryan and McConnell (and 250 other Republicans). That’s why it took nearly a year for the Republicans in Congress to send a major piece of legislation to the president’s desk. They couldn’t agree on anything.

Peter Hanby raises some additional concerns for Democrats in stating that “partisan gerrymandering has lowered the number of competitive House seats, that most of the competitive Senate races are taking place in red states where Trump is more popular than the national average, that the economy is actually doing pretty well. All of them are true. The Senate map is particularly difficult terrain for Democrats, who would have to win in places like Arizona, North Dakota, Missouri, and Tennessee to take back the upper chamber.”

Reading headlines from leftist websites and newspapers is enough to dampen the spirits of any conservative these days, but reading beyond the headlines shows that there’s a lot of wishful thinking going on in Democrat think-tanks and media outlets. Still, Democrats really like their chances in the 2018 midterms.

Political science professor Eric Smith has projected a Democrat takeover of the House, and possibly the Senate, based on a model he “drew on a forecasting model originally developed by political scientists Michael Lewis-Beck and Tom Rice.” Smith writes, “The model predicts that the Republicans will lose 38 seats in the House, a number that would give the Democrats a majority in the next Congress. But it’s important to note that simple models such as this one produce forecasts with real uncertainty. In this case, you can think of the forecast as having a ‘margin of error’ of 38 seats. Thus, a Democratic gain is likely, but the size of that gain is difficult to predict with confidence. Still, a House majority is very much within the Democrats’ reach.”

Is that all they can come up with? As for the GOP, the key will be whether they can keep their act together as they did on tax cuts.

Larry P. Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, gives credence to this notion, opining, “Trump has addressed this problem more directly than anyone since Ronald Reagan — in some ways, more than anyone including Reagan. He would drain the swamp. He would abolish the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Education. He has rallied the people in direct opposition to their governing elite. He has appealed to the people directly in opposition to their government.”

But what about the Trump administration’s significant and numerous accomplishments, as outlined by Mark Alexander in “The Trump Effect”? Arnn notes that we now have “a constitutional majority that controls all the popular branches at the federal level, soon to have a profound effect on the judiciary. In addition, his party advanced from a strong position in state legislatures and governorships. The party of Trump, if the Republican Party is that party, is in a position to make changes, as good or better a position as it has enjoyed since the Great Society.”

Between now and November, the degree to which President Trump is able to realize his bold vision for the country will have a significant impact on the election. That’s why speculation at this point should be taken with a grain of salt.