Naming Names To Explode The Myth

I think we can learn a great deal by looking at this one page at Real Clear Politics, while also acknowledging that sixth year elections have been notoriously bad for the Party in power.

Half the names associated with a Republican House seat threatened by the Dems have a story political junkies know by heart. Or, the seat is open and often contested by a relatively conservative Democrat. Remove Delay, Foley, Ney, Sherwood and Weldon from the list and you have five open formerly R seats being threatened - big whoop!

TX-22: Open (DeLay)
AZ-8: Open (Kolbe)
FL-16: Open (Foley)
IN-8: Hostettler
PA 10: Sherwood
CO-7: Open (Beauprez)
OH-18: Open (Ney)
PA-7: Weldon
NY-24: Open (Boehlert)
IA-1: Open (Nussle)

If you look at the Senate, there aren't a lot of surprises there either. Allen brought on his own troubles, Santorum allowed himself to be demonized and seemingly divorced from his State over several years. Burns, though he may still win, allowed somewhat the same thing by making himself a DC insider - and he's still in good shape, given the GOTW operation in Montana. Michael Steele may yet pull off an upset over a sitting Dem.

Talent has always won by 1 or 2 points and he's still in his race, Corker will most likely win his.

I'm not saying that Iraq fatigue hasn't taken a toll on Republican fortunes, or that the Party hasn't drifted away from the 1994 agenda that proved so incredibly successful. But the notion that the country is going through some great shift, particularly with respect to ideology, isn't supported by the facts.

Considering where the numbers are now, no matter what happens on November 7th, the future for Republicans doesn't look that glum. If they can weed out any remaining bad apples, elevate some good new moderate and conservative candidates and get back to what brought them to the dance in the first place, they should be in fine shape heading into 2008.

Come November 8, the sky will not be falling, it'll simply be the always over-elevated emotion of the Netroots' Left wing nutters crashing down and trying to put the best face on things as Lamont, Ford, McCaskill, and possibly even Tester and Cardin, are told to stand down by voters - the only polling that really counts.

Comments

[Felix]

"Half the names associated with a Republican House seat threatened by the Dems have a story political junkies know by heart."

The number of Republican House seats threatened by the Dems is 60, not 10.

We're almost definitely going to pick up 25+ seats, and we're more likely to win 35+ than to only win 15.

"If you look at the Senate..."

I do think your odds of keeping the Senate are better than 50/50.

"Considering where the numbers are now, no matter what happens on November 7th, the future for Republicans doesn't look that glum ... they should be in fine shape heading into 2008."

I'm sure there were plenty of GOP voices who thought the same thing when they lost the House in 1954.

"But the notion that the country is going through some great shift, particularly with respect to ideology, isn't supported by the facts."

Agreed. 2006 is not going to be marked by conservatives turning into liberals. It's going to be marked by conservatives voting Democratic. That may not be an ideological shift, but it IS going to change how America is governed.

[Dan Riehl]

definitely going to pick up 25+ seats, and we're more likely to win 35+ than to only win 15.

To do that, you'd need to win ALL leans Dem and toss up states and more. You'll need a little more substance than "we are" to convince me.

[Felix]

Convincing is not necessary. The cake comes out of the oven soon enough.

"To do that, you'd need to win ALL leans Dem and toss up states and more."

Of the RCP list, we're going to win at least 13 of the 15 lean Dem seats. But it's useful to look at a list that covers 60 instead of 50, since we're going to take over some unusual districts this year.

Check out Chuck Todd:

http://nationaljournal.com/racerankings/house/

Here's what I'd say the reasonable range of pickups is on that list:

#1 - #12 : net 10 to 12 pickups
#13 - #30 : net 8 to 14 pickups
#31 - #60 : net 2 to 12 pickups

And note I did say ALMOST definitely pick up 25+ seats. If you guys really run the table on election day, I think you can hold it to 20 seats.

-----

We've got a real wind at our backs this year. The electorate doesn't like losing wars.

The only reason you've got a better than 50/50 shot of holding the Senate is because we'd need to win in the Confederacy ex-Florida, and that's the one part of your coalition that's holding.

One illustration of that is we could easily win 35+ seats nationally while only netting one or two seats in the Confederacy ex-Florida.

[WWU Vet]

I think that Riehl is actually correct here. I predict that the Republicans will hold by a very slim majority, 1-3 seats perhaps.

The real beginning of the end for the Republicans will be in two years from now when this country elects either Giuliani or McCain. Four more years of Republican in the White House, but this time either a pro-choice, pro-gay moderate or a maverick reach-across-the-isle conservative and the pendulum will be set to swing hard to the other direction for a long, long time.

[Carol_Herman]

You know, the donks made a terrible error with Ned Lamont!

You think there aren't voters affected by this? (In other words, the donks thought by tossing the Jew, they get the arabs to vote.) But where do these people live? And, wouldn't that then cause pressures on the black caucus?

If the arabs grow stronger in the very neighborhoods once owned by black majorities, what happens to politics up ahead?

A very long time ago, Henry Clay (the WHIG'er), made a bet. He tossed off the popular vote, where ANDREW JACKSON won it. In 1824. And, he gave the seat to John Quincy Adams. Son of Adams. And, in return? Adams made Henry Clay his secretary of war. Such a deal.)

And, as old as Andrew Jackson was, he WON TWICE MORE. Meaning he got an 8-year-run. And, Henry CLay got tossed into the dust bin of history. I guess, better not to remember his perfidy? Whatever.

Given the SPREAD, it's possible to design a "what if" situation for Wednesday, November 8th.

CLOSE FOR THE GOP? Well, then Karl Rove has his work cut out for him. Since you need to build MORE INTEREST ACROSS THE BOARD for Americans willing to bet their "house" on the GOP. No more can you see sitted dogs, barking at ya. Be it Trent Lott. Or Frist. Or Denny Hastert, whose only interest is in protecting his perks. (Typical for a school teacher.)

Okay. A close race that gives the donks the edge? You see those who actually WIN really willing to go out there like palistoolians? To get really, really hated as we march towards 2008?

The key will be the White House in 2008.

While the media dies on the vine.

Or shrinks.

Katie Couric, for instance, is yet to prove her worth.

What's going to happen as PEOPLE SHIFT? Even if the races remain close? The real thing to watch is TREND LINES.

The donks had no trouble tossing Lieberman, for instance. And, he comes back, now, into the senate. With his seat set at ZERO. If the donks don't sweeten the pot for him? He just sits there so he can continue to be treated like a turd? There's no chip on his shoulder? No memory of what it cost him to run against Ned Lamont? He couldn't just sit back, ya know. And breeze into office. (ANd, yes it does take something out of you to have to campaign each and every day, in front of the spotlight!)

Jeffords is also still in the senate as an Independent.

What will I watch? When the 2007 Congress gets sworn in, I want to see how these members choose their next "chair." TREND LINES are important!

And, what about Bush? Why think he'd be a lame duck, if CONGRESS ITSELF has to become MORE pro-active with the White House? Hanging out as an enemy of Bush, does what? Ahead.

Everything so far has been the Saudi money. Even in James Baker's pockets. He, the maroon that forced Reagan into an untenable position to visit Bitburg.

You bet, everything you're seeing in the headlines, now, comes out the Saudi money. And, the crap that Soros provides.

I also think Foley exposes another problem. That the AIDES on the Hill are gay guys. Running a "Camp." You think Americans like "campy crap?" Even when visiting San Francisco, and commenting on how nice it is to see neighborhoods where windows have flower boxes; it still doesn't sell the life-style.

So, there ya go. The left is trying to sell "life style." And, it's got a built-in fault line.

IF the donks go against Bush? BUSH GAINS! Because the TREND LINES favor the White House. And, that's just the way it is!

It's also the way it was for FDR. One man. Rose above H.L. Mencken. So poison pens really work against authors, more often than not.