If the "Stupid" party were smart, the day after this thing gets signed, they would launch Operation "Undo": Send enough (R) Reps and Senators to Washington for a veto proof majority in 2010 and we WILL repeal this (and other specific) legislation/programs.
Actually, there's only 37 Senator Seats up for election in 2010, 19 Dems, 18 Republican as they currently stand. Winning ALL of these would make the Senate Makeup, 59 Repubs and 41 Dems, not even a filibuster proof Majority, much less veto proof (that would be 67 Senators) And, of course, winning all of them is a wild fantasy.
Obama's coalition is young voters, minorities and traditional liberals. McCain's was older white voters (obvious problem with that demographic, they die). If the 2008 election had been whites only, McCain would have won. In 2008 the voters were 74% white, 26% minorities, in 2012 it's looking to be 70% white, 30% minorities. That's a huge expansion of Obama's base through no other means than just demographics (i.e. not policy). Furthermore, the success of Obama's campaign among young voters ages 18-29 was around 70%, some of these voters will obviously go the other way, but he's likely to keep most of them in 2012 when they will be the 22-33 age bracket. The voters who are now 15-18 who couldn't vote last year will probably also follow their near peer group and vote for Obama again.
Having YOUR voters die off while the nation's demographics increase your opponent's has to be a nightmare situation for any political strategist. Pat Buchanan of all people wrote a column about this noting that in 5 election cycles starting in 1992 18 States with 248 electoral college votes went Democratic EVERY time, while 13 states with 93 electoral votes went Republican. Imagine the difference for Karl Rove and James Carville. Rove has to find 178 electoral votes to win, while Carville has to find only 23. It's a huge uphill climb.