Tweet
Originally posted by DanS
In the Senate, I believe there is a good chance that the GOP will not lose any seats, on a net basis.
In the Senate, I believe there is a good chance that the GOP will not lose any seats, on a net basis.
-
That's absolutely absurd. -
Its interesting. This is what a bunch of Republicans are now starting to sound like. Basically, everyone agrees that the Dems will make major gains this cycle, and so the only way to for the GOP to keep its dignity intact (hah) is to say, well, the Democrats didn't take back either body, so really, we won.Originally posted by DanS
Basically, IMO, if the Dems don't take one or both chambers of congress, this election cycle will have been an abject failure for them.
And for the record, I think the Democrats gain 5 senate seats, and 20 house seats."Remember, there's good stuff in American culture, too. It's just that by "good stuff" we mean "attacking the French," and Germany's been doing that for ages now, so, well, where does that leave us?" - ElokComment
-
I'm not into the managing expectations game. Personally, I think losing the house or senate would be good for the GOP and the country (cleaning the stable floors).
Rather, I look at the momentum. It's awful for Bush and the GOP generally. For the last several years, Bush has had about one positive week a year. Add to the fact that presidents as a rule lose support in the house and senate as they progress through their terms. I look at that and think that if the Dems can't take advantage of this opportunity for some meaningful gains, then the Democratic Party is broken in some fundamental way.
Regarding why I think the GOP has a chance to more or less hold the line, there are several things. One is that the Dems have relied on the thought that this will be a "throw the bums out" year. This may turn out to be true, but I think they have neglected their ground game in case it's not -- e.g., getting out the vote and motivating voters with a cohesive counterprogram like the Contract With America. Also, some of these states may revert to form, especially where there is a strong GOP infrastructure. F.e., Montana and Ohio. Lastly, the GOP has a chance in some traditionally money Dem states like New Jersey and Maryland. We'll have to see how those races play out.
There are other reasons of various impacts, like the continuing trend toward voter self-identification as conservative and the falling price of gasoline.Last edited by DanS; September 27, 2006, 01:18.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
I get bonus marks if i can guess how many seats each party will win.
For the Senate, I'm going to probably guess 52-48 GOP.
Haven't decided on the House yet.Resident Filipina Lady Boy Expert.Comment
-
The GOP has had a lot of success at voter turnout in the past couple elections. However:Originally posted by DanS
Regarding why I think the GOP has a chance to more or less hold the line, there are several things. One is that the Dems have relied on the thought that this will be a "throw the bums out" year. This may turn out to be true, but I think they have neglected their ground game in case it's not -- e.g., getting out the vote and motivating voters with a cohesive counterprogram like the Contract With America. Also, some of these states may revert to form, especially where there is a strong GOP infrastructure. F.e., Montana. Lastly, the GOP has a chance in some traditionally money Dem states like New Jersey and Maryland.
There are other reasons of various impacts, like the continuing trend toward voter self-identification as conservative and the falling price of gasoline.
I was working for the Tim Kaine gubernatorial campaign in Virginia last year, and as election day approached, everyone was talking about the GOP 72 hour Get Out the Vote plan. But on election day, things didn't pan out the way the GOP wanted. Obviously, they didn't win the election, but one of the reasons was actually the failure of their GOtV plan. The fact is, traditionally Republican voters just weren't motivated to go to the polls.
I think what we saw in that election is a microcosm for what we will see in this election. And unlike previous years, this election the Democrats do seem to stand for something. The House minority leadership did come out with a legislative plan (Six in 06), which is playing into the broader narrative that it is time to change the course in Washington. But in the end, this will come down to "throwing the bums out," and that is the final nail in the lid of the GOP's coffin. Right now, Congress's approval rating is actually lower than Bush's. Gas prices may continue to go down, but what won't change is the growing feeling that Congress is not meeting the needs of individual constituents.
So in the end, we'll see. But I'm pretty optimistic about Democratic chances."Remember, there's good stuff in American culture, too. It's just that by "good stuff" we mean "attacking the French," and Germany's been doing that for ages now, so, well, where does that leave us?" - ElokComment
-
Given all of those things that you list that appear favorable to the Dems, why is it odd that I suggest that it would be a Dem failure to not take the House and/or the Senate?I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Suggesting that the Dems won't gain control of either house is quite reasonable.Originally posted by DanS
Given all of those things that you list that appear favorable to the Dems, why is it odd that I suggest that it would be a Dem failure to not take the House and/or the Senate?
Suggesting that the Republicans won't lose seats in both houses is not.Last edited by Bosh; September 27, 2006, 09:49.Stop Quoting BenComment
-
[q=Admiral]Right now, Congress's approval rating is actually lower than Bush's. [/q]
As a whole, yes. But when you ask people about their own Congressman, that approval rating shoots to around 50%. So they hate Congress as a whole, but think their guy isn't that bad.“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)Comment
-
No, the GOP will definitely lose seats in the House.Originally posted by Bosh
Suggesting that the Republicans won't lose seats in both houses is not.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Montana's developing a Dem infrastructure. In '04, Brian Schweitzer took the Governor's mansion, and remains one of the most popular Governors in the country, and his party took control of the legislature. And of course, the other senate seat is a Dem (Baucus). Then there's the fact that Abrahmoff was bff with Burns.Also, some of these states may revert to form, especially where there is a strong GOP infrastructure. F.e., Montana and Ohio.
In Ohio, the GOP is scandal-ridden. Taft is the least popular Governor in the country (though Ernie Fletcher and Frank Murkowski are sneaking up on him). Blackwell's about to lose in the race to succeed him in a landslide. No one wants these people to campaign for them. Having control of state offices isn't a plus right now (except, possibly, the Secretary of State's...).
Maryland is a longshot. The only poll that showed a close race has been SUSA's most recent one, and that was likely an outlier. The end of the primary may have given Steele a bounce, but it's not likely to last. If you look at the average of recent polls, Steele has about as decent a shot at victory as Pederson, i.e. Cheney-like.Lastly, the GOP has a chance in some traditionally money Dem states like New Jersey and Maryland.
It's true that Kean is looking pretty good right now and has the momentum, but so do Ford and Webb - and no one expected them to make it.
Between the falling price of gas and the popping of the housing bubble, I'd say that it's more or less a wash in the short term.There are other reasons of various impacts, like the continuing trend toward voter self-identification as conservative and the falling price of gasoline.
I don't think that the Dems will gain the six seats needed for control (I'm inclined to say 5), but the idea that there won't be a net change is improbable beyond imagination.
As for the House, if you believe the most recent independent polls in competitive districts, the Dems will take the body. I'd put it at a 75% chance right now."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Well the House seems like a complete toss-up at this point. I expect that there's a big chance that the results in the House will come down to lawyering and vote recounting. I'd give the Republicans an edge but a very slight one.
The Democrats will gain in the Senate, its very silly to say otherwise. Santorum is dead in the water and the only realistic pick-up opportunity the Republicans have is NJ and to say that the Dems won't gain any seats except for Santorum's when they're ahead or neck and neck in a half dozen or so is very very very very unlikely. I except maybe a three seat or so Dem pickup in the Senate.Stop Quoting BenComment
-
Redefining "success" for the Dems as paltry gains doesn't make sense to me. They should slaughter the GOP, and have failed if they don't.
A 1 or 2 seat Dem pickup in the Senate is nothing like success. That's the GOP holding the line.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Well, there are two seats that the national party have basically given up in - TX 22 and AZ 8. Polls in CO 7 and IN 8 show the Republican candidates down by over 15 points. So the number that the Dems effectively have to make up is 11. And that's looking more and more likely given the sheer number of competitive districts this cycle (see, i.e. the Constituent Dynamics polls).
Short of massive fraud or an October suprise, I don't see the Republicans pulling it off."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
I basically agree. But on the other hand, taking the Senate has only recently become a semi-realistic goal for the Dems this cycle. Defining that as success is absurd. In terms of the seats that are up, '06 isn't a good year for the Dems. '08 will have a lot more opportunities.Redefining "success" for the Dems as paltry gains doesn't make sense to me. They should slaughter the GOP, and have failed if they don't.
A 1 or 2 seat Dem pickup in the Senate is nothing like success. That's the GOP holding the line.
So far, NV (and to a lesser extent, ME) has been the only real disappointment this cycle. And even that race has potential to tighten up."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
As for the reason I say a five seat pickup, statistical tossups generally break to one party (with one or two exceptions). In '04 and '02 it was the GOP; in '00, it was the Dems."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
Comment