The newly empowered Democrats were today renewing calls for Donald Rumsfeld to be sacked as the US secretary of defence.
George Bush last week gave Mr Rumsfeld an unequivocal vote of confidence for his "fantastic job". But one topic on bloggers' minds today is whether the midterms will prompt Mr Rumsfeld's resignation. One UK blogger, Richard Norman writes: "The Democrats now have some political capital. Rumsfeld should be their first purchase."
Andrew Sullivan is unequivocal:
"If this election was a referendum on the war and its execution, the will of the people is clear. No one can have confidence in Rumsfeld as defence secretary at this point. He has to go. I know the president said he'd keep him for two more years regardless. (It was one of the dumbest things he has ever said.) But any president wishing to form a sustainable middle ground on Iraq now has to abandon Rumsfeld. It's that simple. Fire him; and reach out to the Democrats and moderate Republicans in order to form a strategy for victory or stability in Iraq. And have the good sense to be graceful about it."
After sunrise today in the US, Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the Democrats' campaign committee in the House of Representatives, told NBC television: "You cannot have a new strategy [in Iraq] with the same incompetent management directing it."
Asked specifically if the Democrats would press to force Mr Rumsfeld out, he said: "It is clear he has not met the challenges that we need in Iraq."
The newly re-elected senator, Joseph Lieberman, who stood as an independent but has promised to vote with the Democrats, said: "Thanks Don, you've served the country but really we need somebody new there."
