US media sees post-election gridlock

"Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's only the mid-terms, but here is an opportunity to bring a little balance back to the government," writes Karen in her Bodylotion blog.

Hers is not too unique a sentiment on the day the US decides whether it has had enough Republican control of Congress for its taste.

"They [Republicans] have sent hundreds to die in a war based on lies," Karen says, touching a raw nerve with the US electorate - that of Iraq, the central theme of the campaign.

Political gridlock may follow a Democrat victory

What most US media outlets seem to agree on is that some sort of shift is on the cards - the degree will be known only after ballots are counted.

And navigating through the papers you can see why.

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann of The New York Post predict a "bloody Tuesday" for the Republican party of George W Bush.

"Even with those nail-biters too close to call, 2006 will go down in history as one of the worst years for the Republicans," they write.

Bush does not publicly stew as other presidents have Peter Baker in The Washington Post

"Why the rout?" they continue. "Bush let Iraq be the major issue of the election... defending a failure."

The Miami Herald sees an ominous election-eve omen in Mr Bush's final campaign rally in Pensacola - ostensibly to support the Republican candidate for governor, Charlie Crist. Only that Mr Crist skipped the rally - putting some distance with a president increasingly seen as a liability.

Historical analogies

But not all is lost, just yet, some Republicans argue, says Linda Feldmann of the Christian Science Monitor.

"Some Republicans, citing a superior turnout operation and a tendency among voters to 'come home' to their political base on election day, are holding out hope that they can minimise losses and even hold on to a sliver of a majority," she says.

The travel schedules of President Bush, Vice-President [Dick] Cheney, and other top administration officials betray a GOP playing defence Linda Feldmann Christian Science Monitor

"But privately, many Republicans are bracing themselves for a loss of at least the House [of Representatives], saying that national conditions - frustration over Iraq, scandals, economic insecurity, and an unpopular president - are likely to overwhelm the party's structural strengths.

History also works against the Republicans, she says, "Two-term presidents almost always see a loss of House seats by their party in the sixth year in office."

However, this is not a simple accident of history, Linda Feldmann argues, pointing to seats that were once solid and secure and are now less so or vice-versa.

"The travel schedules of President Bush, Vice-President [Dick] Cheney, and other top administration officials betray a GOP playing defence, despite their rosy predictions that the party will hold onto Congress."

Mr Bush soldiers on, regardless of criticism

Peter Baker in The Washington Post says Bush "soldiers on".

"The rest of the world may see an unpopular president in the midst of an unpopular war," Baker writes.

But Mr Bush "does not publicly stew as other presidents have".

"He powers through event after event as if he were still the leader the country rallied behind after Sept 11, 2001."

"To his critics, it sometimes seems as if [President] Bush lives in his own world, oblivious or unwilling to accept the shifting reality around him."

And Mr Bush insists he is not worried by polls predicting a Republican loss.

"But at least one person who saw him in private a few days ago interpreted his body language to mean that he did not think Tuesday will be a great day for him," Baker writes, pointing to the fact that the US leader seeks solace in history "certain that he will be vindicated, much as Harry S Truman was unpopular in his day but is revered today".

Perceptions matter

Whatever the result of the vote, one thing is certain so far - the campaign was "one of the nastiest battles and the most expensive ever", says Ronald Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times.

He predicts that "months of debate over Iraq, political corruption and the Republican dominance of Washington could produce the highest voter turnout in decades for a mid-term election".

Perceptions matter in politics, and this White House has shown it knows how to shape them; it would no doubt relish trying to weaken its new Congressional foes by portraying a small Democratic edge as a loss Adam Nagourney The New York Times

The article points to a national USA Today/Gallup poll suggesting 68% of adults were "absolutely certain" to vote - "the highest level of interest Gallup has recorded for a non-presidential election in the half a century it has measured American opinion".

A contributing factor - Mr Bush himself.

"One of the hallmarks of Bush's presidency has been the passionate emotions he inspires in supporters and opponents, and that pattern shows every sign of generating a large turnout today," says Bronwstein, before speculating on what could come next.

"A Democratic majority in either chamber could set the stage for two years of intense political conflict. Democrats would be likely to use the subpoena power that comes with majority control to aggressively examine Bush policies in Iraq and at home that they argue Republican lawmakers have failed to monitor."

According to Adam Nagourney of The New York Times, "The scope of a Democratic victory could go a long way in determining just how much power the party had in Congress."

"Perceptions matter in politics, and this White House has shown it knows how to shape them; it would no doubt relish trying to weaken its new Congressional foes by portraying a small Democratic edge as a loss," he writes.

Washington will be as effectively paralysed as it was during President Clinton's impeachment trial. And let us remember that it was in that incubator that Osama Bin laden was able to plan the 9/11 attacks Dick Morris and Eileen McGann The New York Post

"The obvious best outcome for Democrats would be to win control of both houses, allowing them to claim a public mandate.

"If they win the House by a large margin but do not get the Senate, they will also no doubt claim something of a mandate, though that would seem to be a recipe for gridlock."

On a sombre warning, The New York Post authors conclude: "Washington will be as effectively paralysed as it was during President Clinton's impeachment trial. And let us remember that it was in that incubator that Osama Bin laden was able to plan the 9/11 attacks."