This is a part of a series of posts analyzing the 2010 midterm elections. This post will analyze the Pennsylvania Senate election, in which Republican Pat Toomey won a narrow victory over Democrat Joe Sestak in a Democratic-leaning state.

Like Atrios, I’m unfortunately old enough to remember the last time a Democratic presidency ran aground on (among other things) the shoals of a Republican victory in the midterm elections. So I’m just as unsurprised to see, almost immediately after Tuesday’s debacle, the GOP and its media allies warming up the overseas “puke funnel” by [...]

At the youth town hall this week, young voters came to ask President Obama questions about his past policies and future intentions. These young voters understand that this time of year, the mid-term elections, is when we interview candidates for the job of representing us in Congress. The president, though, called it “silly season” — an insult to them and to all American voters trying to decide whether to re-hire incumbents or look to another candidate for the job.

The Republicans’ biggest advantage over the Democrats is money. Not because they have more of it, although they usually do. No, it’s because their base is almost completely aligned with their corporate and wealthy big-money donors, while the Democratic base is the complete opposite.

Something’s different about 2010. Try as I might, I’m having a hard time getting excited about the fall campaign. It’s not that the Democrats are now on the defensive, or that the Republicans have succumbed to the Tea Party lunacy, or even that all of the Congressional gains of 2006 and 2008 might be undone. What’s gotten me so indifferent is the growing realization that these miderms don’t really matter. And in retrospect, neither did 2006 nor 2008.

The Democrats are going to lose big this fall, especially in the House. I don’t think anyone is disputing this. What is worth debating is why we’re going to see such a dramatic reversal of the gains that were won in 2006 and 2008.