The White House is bracing for guerrilla warfare on the homefront politically if Republicans in upcoming elections lose control of the US Congress -- and with it, the president's ability to shape and dominate the national agenda.
Republicans are battling to keep their majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
But polls and analysts in both parties increasingly suggest Democrats will capture the House and possibly the Senate on Election Day Nov. 7.
Democrats need a 15-seat pickup to regain the House and a gain of six seats to claim the Senate.
Everything could change overnight for President George W. Bush, who has governed for most of the past six years with a Republican Congress and with little support from Democrats.
"Every session you change the way you do business with the Congress. And you test the mood of the Congress, find out what their appetite will be. But it doesn't change your priorities," the president told ABC News.
Former president Bill Clinton had to deal with the Democrats' loss of control of Congress in 1994. But Clinton had something Bush does not: six more years to regain his footing.
Bush has barely over two years left. The loss of either house in voting next month could hasten Bush's descent into a lame-duck presidency.
"If he loses one house here, President Bush will enter the last two years very wounded," said David Gergen, a former White House adviser who served in the administrations of presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and Clinton.
"He will have the capacity to say no to Democratic legislation, but he won't have the capacity to say yes to his own legislation," said Gergen, who teaches at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.
Democratic victories essentially could block Bush's remaining agenda and usher in a period of intense partisan bickering over nearly every measure to come before Congress.
Loss of either chamber also could subject his administration to endless congressional inquiries and investigations.
The president and his chief political strategist, Karl Rove, last week expressed renewed confidence of retaining both House and Senate; others are not so upbeat.
"All of our numbers look pretty bad and there's no question that there's a jet stream in our face," said House Majority Leader John Boehner, a Republican.
Furthermore, some of Bush's fighting in the trenches is likely to be with fellow Republicans as they seek to find a new standard bearer for 2008 -- and distance themselves from an unpopular war, the unpopular president who waged it, and congressional scandals that include former Republican representative Mark Foley's inappropriate e-mails to teenage assistants in the House.
"There's no question that the Republican coalition is stressed over the way Washington has been handling fiscal matters, the Foley affair, the Iraq war," Republican consultant Scott Reed said. "All of these are coming together at the same time."
Already, Republicans are showing divisions on Iraq policy.
Fresh skepticism has come from Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner; Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, from Bush's state of Texas; and former secretary of state James Baker, a longtime Bush family loyalist.
If Republicans lose their majorities, it will be that much harder for Bush to hold together already splintering party cohesion on Iraq.
Bush has been quoted by journalist Bob Woodward as saying, "I'll stay in Iraq even if the only support I have left is from my wife and my dog."
A Democratic takeover and Republican defections could make that day seem closer.
While the Senate has been difficult for Bush, even with Republican control, the House for most of his presidency has delivered for him. That could be about to change.
The White House traditionally loses seats in midterm congressional races. The most recent exception was 2002, when Bush's party picked up seats.
Many Democrats see the upcoming elections as a mirror image of 1994, with the parties reversed.
Then, Republicans rallied behind firebrand Representative Newt Gingrich, announced a "Contract with America," and stormed to victory, seizing both House and Senate from Democrats.
It was a huge blow to Clinton, made worse by the lavish and almost-presidential reception Gingrich received around Washington as he was inaugurated as House speaker.
Doug Schoen, Clinton's pollster then, said those times were bleak, including Clinton's baleful insistence to reporters in early 1995 that "the president is relevant."
But Clinton soon figured out how to enhance his relevance and influence, reaching out to Republicans on some of their own issues, such as welfare law overhaul and "talking about the common good," Schoen said.
Clinton went on to easily win re-election in 1996.
But Schoen said he doubts Bush can do the same.
"After 9-11, except for a brief period, he's governed from the right. There's so much bitterness and division, it's going to be tougher for him to do it than perhaps it was for Clinton," Schoen said.
Some of Bush's sharpest critics would rise to top positions with a Democratic takeover.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi probably would become speaker. Representative Charles Rangel, a Democrat who is a foe of extending Bush tax cuts, would become chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.
Representative John Conyers, who has sponsored legislation calling for steps that could eventually open the way to Bush's impeachment, would lead the Judiciary Committee.
If Democrats win the Senate, Democratic leader Harry Reid -- one of the most outspoken of all Bush critics -- probably would ascend to majority leader.
The Republican Party chairman, Ken Mehlman, even raises the specter of a leadership troika of Pelosi, Reid and Democratic party chief Howard Dean, in the party's fundraising mailings to Republicans.
Bush, in his own get-out-the-vote appeal, told Republicans: "The consequences of not succeeding this fall are dire for our agenda for America."
Bush even suggested last week that insurgents in Iraq were stepping up their violence in a bid to influence the elections.
Polls this year show a more dramatic tilt toward the Democrats than polling in 1994 showed a tilt toward Republicans. But redistricting has made far fewer congressional districts competitive.
A Democratic takeover of one or more chambers would all but guarantee that Bush would not get his Social Security overhaul or further tax cuts through Congress.
One Bush initiative that actually might see improved chances is his immigration proposal for a "guest worker" program. Ironically, this is a program that is getting more Democratic than Republican support.
Stephen Wayne, a professor of government at Georgetown University, said a loss of House or Senate would cripple Bush domestically -- but might actually give him more room to find a way out of Iraq.
"Were he to choose to moderate the course in Iraq, the Democrats would say, `I told you so' and the Republicans would say, `Thank you,"' Wayne said.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations