September 6, 2004

LOW-BALLING AND HIGH HOPES:

GOP hope is six-seat gain in Nov. (Jonathan E. Kaplan, 9/07/04, The Hill)

Senior House Republicans believe the GOP will gain about six seats in the Nov. 2 election, increasing the party’s majority in the chamber to 35, although they say it is too early to start making hard-and-fast predictions. [...]

A senior House Republican leader, who briefed reporters at the GOP convention in New York but declined a request to be identified, also said that he expected to win an additional six seats and hold the Democrats to 200 or fewer seats.

Winning six additional seats is not extraordinary given the cushion Republicans have in Texas, where Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) helped engineer a mid-decade redistricting plan earlier this year. Of six races in Texas, Republicans are likely to win five, leaving Republicans to beat one more Democratic incumbent to achieve their six-seat goal. [...]

With Rep. Doug Bereuter’s (R-Neb.) resignation effective Aug. 31, Republicans hold 228 House seats, Democrats have 205 seats, and there is one independent, Rep. Bernie Sanders (Vt.).

Republicans have to defend 19 open seats, whereas the Democrats have to keep hold of just 14. Democrats must win 13 GOP seats to reach 218, the threshold for a one-seat majority.


240 is the number.

Posted by Orrin Judd at September 6, 2004 11:41 PM
Comments

If Bush wins 53-47 (a big if), and the Republicans win only 6 to 12 house seats, then a tremendous mistake has been made by Republicans.

There are easily 10 seats outside of Texas in the 10 other states of the confederacy, that Republicans should have. I'm afraid it's not going to happen.

Considering the unprecedented results they had in
2002, the screwup in Illinois is ridiculous. Ryan should have stayed in the race and told everyone to butt-out of his private business.


Posted by: h-man at September 7, 2004 7:20 AM

h:

When's the last time the GOP was over 240 House seats?

Ryan would have won, but the Party doesn't allow such men.

Posted by: oj at September 7, 2004 7:26 AM

H - the House districts are drawn so exactly by the state legislatures that of the 435 seats only 20-30 are actually competitive. So even if Bush wins easily there may not be a big pickup in the House. Picking up seats in the Senate is more important given that the Senate has blocked a lot of legislation that the House passed.
IL does seem to be a screwup this year but if it is the only screwup and the GOP holds the presidency and picks up 4 or more Senate seats and 6 or more house seats and it will be a good night.

Posted by: AWW at September 7, 2004 8:16 AM

Ryan probably didn't want his private life made public in order to protect his children. It is apparent that his no-talent, peroxided, siliconed, bimbo ex-wife had no such scruples when it came to squeezing his scrotum for a few extra shekels.

The GOP has a big problem in NY House races. Jack Quinn retired in Buffalo and Amo Houghton in the Southern Tier. The Buffalo seat should go Democrat and the Southern Tier might, as it is an area where anyone with any get-up-and-go, got up and left. Hillary carried it vs Lamebrain Lazio.

Since there are probably no more than about 40 seats even remotely in play nationally, I'd have to bet that the GOP gains about 7, putting them at 236, with the Democrats and the Socialist at 199.

Posted by: Bart at September 7, 2004 8:21 AM

Bart;

I think you're being way too harsh on Ryan's wife. She, in fact, supported him in requesting that the divorce records remain sealed. It was the Chicago Tribune that forced them open (unsurprisingly, of course, the Tribune has shown no interest whatsoever in opening Kerry's sealed divorce records).

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at September 7, 2004 10:20 AM

"no-talent, peroxided, siliconed, bimbo ex-wife"

Hey now, don't insult the woman I love :)

Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at September 7, 2004 10:36 AM

Ali,

My preference is Roselyn Sanchez. :)

AOG,

This is a woulda, coulda, shoulda situation. By letting all the crap get into the Court records rather than keeping it all buried in some lawyer's archive, where it could mysteriously disappear like a Rose law firm billing record, she opened the door to what eventually happened. She certainly knew that he was running for office and that 'damaging' revelations would torpedo those efforts. She incorporated all that crap not to avoid the divorce but to grab for the dough.

As a general rule, I am opposed to alimony but I firmly approve of the use of methods commonplace in the bookmaking and loan sharking industries to collect child support. Deadbeat parents, who might not flinch at garnishments or attachments, might be a little more forthcoming if the rule were miss a payment, lose a finger.

Posted by: Bart at September 7, 2004 11:11 AM

"[T]he Party doesn't allow such men."

Which is why I'm a Democrat.

Bart:

There's plenty wrong with the way child support is awarded and administered, and there are many good cases for alimony.
Family court is a sewer with few good outcomes. We just have to make the best of it.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at September 7, 2004 12:03 PM

Michael:

Men who don't mind when other men degrade their wives should be Democrats.

Posted by: oj at September 7, 2004 12:09 PM

Michael,

Again these are fairly simple matters made complex. Child support should be the amount of money the children would get the benefit of were the marriage still intact. Property settlements are an accounting matter. Each party gets what he/she brought in along with its logical accretion. All the rest gets split in half. As for alimony, in a world of no-fault divorce, why can't the spouse get a job? We've seen the spectacle of Fred Couples' ex-wife getting money to maintain her polo ponies. That's a disgrace.

OJ,

If it doesn't cost me money or negatively impact on my life or prospects in some significant way, it ain't my problem. My G-d will judge me, and his will judge him.

Posted by: Bart at September 7, 2004 12:30 PM

Bart:

Your God calls upon you to love your neighbor, not despise him so much that you let him degrade himself.

Posted by: oj at September 7, 2004 1:40 PM

Let's not kid ourselves. Yes Ryan and the Illinois GOP screwed up at nearly every opportunity, but there was no way in Hell a Minority democrat wasn't going to win the Illinois seat.

Coming off a successful war the President should be coasting to re-election and spend all his time helping other Republicans running for borderline House and Senate Seats, but the Press in a twisting of the truth that would make Orwell proud, has made success look like failure enough to fool enough sheep that Bush has had to fight tooth and nail for his own survival. Gains in House and Senate will be modest for that reason.

Posted by: MarkD at September 7, 2004 7:56 PM

oj:

How "degrade" ?
I thought your position was that heterosex normally caused women to submit, which you feel is right and proper. Therefore, if she chose to submit to more than one man, especially at the request of her mate, what's the big deal ?
You can't have it both ways.

Bart:

By logical accretion, I assume you also mean that if one partner comes with nothing, but puts the other through school, they're entitled to half of everything.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at September 8, 2004 11:41 AM

The other man isn't her husband.

Posted by: oj at September 8, 2004 11:50 AM
« DUELING KERRY'S: | Main | NOT ANOTHER COWBOY! »