By Trevor Williams ’13, Staff Writer

Two years ago this November, as it achieved landslide victories in both houses of Congress and its presidential nominee rode a wave of popular support into the White House, the Democratic Party appeared to have found its way. Finally, its members reasoned, they could implement their legislative agendas.

And they did—sort of. Unfortunately for President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress, things did not pan out as anticipated. In keeping with the schizophrenic nature of the American electorate, public opinion soured. Now, the Democrats face the very real possibility of being forced to cede control of one, if not both, chambers of Congress to the GOP come Election Day (November 2).

The statistician Nate Silver, who analyzed baseball stats before gaining national recognition as a political analyst, predicted state-by-state outcomes during the 2008 presidential election. All were correct except for his Indiana prediction. He recently predicted that there is a two in three chance that the Republicans will gain control of the House of Representatives and a one in four chance they will control the Senate. At any rate, the Democrats will lose their huge majorities. But what effect will this have?

The result would seem obvious—an already ineffective legislature would become even more lackadaisical, and President Obama would be at risk of becoming a lame duck president. But this may not necessarily be the case. To govern effectively, Congress needs to be either draconian or bipartisan. It is worth remembering that the Democrats have had an eighteen-seat Senate advantage, and it still took months for the Senate to pass a watered-down health insurance overhaul bill. If the Republicans have a real stake in leadership—meaning they can actually be held accountable for their actions and can’t just punitively oppose Obama in lockstep—the GOP will be forced to compromise, and we will start to see some dialogue.