Some Democrats may think the Katrina mess will mostly hurt Republicans. Maybe so, but it's probably going to impact both main parties, as it should.

It should certainly hurt Dem's in Louisiana. Not sure it will have much effect on Dem's in other states.

Really ?
I thought it would probably adversely impact Republicans more. Perhaps it is because Democrats hold more local government offices ?

Nationally, I agree, it appears to have. Much more. I think the only impact on Dem's though was at the state level of La.

Haven't seen any polls though on Blanco since Katrina, so, I am just guessing.

Maybe Katrina was a blessing in deguise. But only if it's made the voters wakeup and smell the coffee.

Ron, welcome to VOID,

Nature has a way of creating new growth and development out of calamity. Human nature I have found is a bit less predictable in that regard.

Polls indicate a significant number of voters are smelling the coffee. The question is will they remember the smell in Nov. 2006?

David,

Hopefully we and those like us can keep the smell around long enough for it to really make a difference.

In addition to Katrina, the problems seem be piling up now.

The corruption in the federal government is coming to light. How deep does it really go? Understandably, many people will question whether a molevolent mindset exists within government. And, rightly so. It’s a dirty business.
The indictment of Libby may be just another of the countless examples of smug, arrogant, irresponsible, and unaccountbable government that is threatening the future and security of the nation.

And, it’s not over yet. Rove is still under invetigation. Others are too. More indictments may be on the way. Still, no one knows who’s Novak’s primary source is.

In the big scheme, the Libby indictment isn’t as important as the many serious problems facing the nation. It’s just another predictable symptom of an already corrupt, dysfunctional, fiscally, & morally bankrupt government. Our government has been hihacked by the PC (“Political Class”). This has been going on for decades.

But look at the failures to date (many in the last 10 months):
(1) indictment of Libby for leaking CIA information
(2) failure to reform Social Security
(3) failure after Katrina
(4) failure of border security (calling Minute Men vigilantes)
(5) failure of appointees
(6) failure of Supreme Court appointment (Harriet Miers)
(7) failure to cut spending and pork-barrel (where the hell is his veto pen?)
(8) failure by allientating allies
(9) failure to get body armour for all troops in Iraq, and armour for humvees
(10) failure of reliable intelligence

Are the people happy with either party ? Both are equally responsible for all of this.
But, the Republicans are not doing well. Will they be able to hold onto their seats in government? It doesn't look good, and polls of whether the people think the nation is on the right path are down and falling.

But, does that mean voters should flock back to the Democratic Party? No. Not unless they're non-incumbnets. Otherwise, we (the voters) will simply continue to empower them (both D's and R's) to simply continue to take turns being irresponsible and unaccountable.

Therefore, consider VOTING only for a NON-incumbent candidate.
NO exceptions. Repeatedly, EVERY election.
UNTIL things drastically improve, and the nation's top 10 most pressing problems are adequately addressed ( i.e. the nation's most no-brainer, non-contentious, most serious problems; see 9 Point Plan below for a few ideas to start with ).

Sample list of things for government to do following the next election: http://home.comcast.net/~d.a.n/NinePointPlan.htm

These ideas are not the platform of VOID. These ideas are simply some examples offered up as some simple ways to restore transparency, checks-and-balances, responsibility, accountability, and democracy within the government.

I don't feel that right now voters should vote for anyone from the main parties even if they aren't incumbents.
I'm not sure that they'd do any different than the politicians they replace. Most of these canidates have been in the main parties for so long that they've learned the corrupt ways of the parties.
Maybe after we send the wakeup call and ALL politicians know that they need to represent WE THE PEOPLE then voting for a Republican or Democrat would be OK. I'm just not sure it's so good of an idea right now though.

Ron,
Yeah, I feel the same way.
The sticky part is that a non-profit organization must be non-partisan (by law, I think).
I, personally, will be voting non-incumbent, and non-main-party.
Perhaps, for now, voting non-incumbent will be sufficient to get the message across to them, because none of them want to be ousted.
Also, some people may never leave their party, but may be persuaded to vote non-incumbent.

I'm not saying that VIOD should tell anyone not to vote for a mainstream party canidate. I think that would defeat the purpose of VOID. Not to mention it most like would be illegal if VOID is non-profit.
One of my daughters is Republican (thought I'd raised her better) and I doubt if she'll ever leave the party. However she is concidering the non-incumbent vote in the up comming Congressional election.

BTW, she just had her 5th & 6th last night.
Yeah, TWIN GIRLS. There our 15th & 16th grandyoungins.

Ron Brown,

Congratulations about your new grandbabies!!!

And, with VOID, it's not necessary to vote outside any one party to vote non-incumbent. As a Republican, she should be able to vote in the primaries, and can spread the word about a non-incumbent vote there. If that doesn't work, she can always write in the best challenger from the primaries.