Liberal hubris alert!

David Sirota, a disreputable lefty pundit, gets carried away in an online column for The Nation, suggesting that it was “a mandate election” that may be known as “the Great Democratic Realignment”:

There is one more election that will happen in this, the year that history may one day call the Great Democratic Realignment. It is the election for House majority leader between contenders US Reps. Steny Hoyer and Jack Murtha, set for Thursday.

…But after a mandate election like this year’s, Democrats do not have to settle. They have a rare opportunity to define themselves for the long-term on the crucial national security and economic issues key to changing our country and keeping control of Congress. They must find the courage to choose not a follower, but a majority leader. His name is Jack Murtha.

However, the best political science research suggests that realigninment is not a meaningful concept – electoral change is far more gradual and contingent than realignment theory would suggest. In addition, while I don’t believe in mandates (they’re essentially a social construction), it’s especially implausible to see this year’s results as a positive mandate for almost anything besides (maybe) a change in Iraq policy.