October 25, 2006

51-49 OR BUST:

If they can't make it this year (John Farmer, 10/23/06, NEWHOUSE NEWS SERVICE)

Look at it this way: If Democrats can't capture either the Senate or the House of Representatives in a climate this toxic for Republicans — incompetent conduct of a needless war abroad and mounting evidence of congressional corruption at home — they'll be a national laughingstock.

It won't be easy, especially capturing the Senate, where Democrats need to win at least six of the seven or eight seats rated toss-ups while retaining the seat they already hold in New Jersey that's considered up for grabs. The House, where Democrats need a net gain of 15 seats among the 40 to 45 deemed competitive, looks more doable. But no sure thing. Still, should they blow it, Democrats can expect a popular demand that they do the right thing and file for bankruptcy. Go the way of the Whigs, as it were. [...]

Russ Hemenway of the liberal National Committee for an Effective Congress in New York has been working in national electoral politics for more than 50 years and says he has seen few years as promising for Democrats as this one — but the risk that goes with that promise is great.

The impact of another Democratic failure Nov. 7, he said, "would be a terrible psychological blow." On a more practical level, it would be disastrous for Democratic efforts to recruit attractive candidates in the years immediately ahead and for raising money, he said.

Democrats have enjoyed one of their best years in memory in the search for top-tier candidates for the Senate and House, Hemenway said. But it wasn't easy and it required an extravagant promise.

"We told them they'll be in the majority in the next Congress, that these were the best conditions for Democrats in years," Hemenway said. "We told them they will be able to get things done."


Even if they were to win both houses they couldn't get anything done that the President doesn't approve of--that's just silly.

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 25, 2006 11:18 PM
Comments

"needless war abroad" - I think the writer's political leanings are pretty clear from this statement.

"Congressional corruption" - problem here is that there is just as much on the DEM side as on the GOP side,

What is interesting is that are multiple articles saying that if the Dems don't win it all this year they will self destruct - given how strong the economy is they may have overestimated their chances.

Posted by: AWW at October 26, 2006 12:03 AM

"congressional corruption at home" such as William Jefferson hiding $90,000 payoff in his office refrigerator, Harry Reids makes a million profit on land that he does not own, and Menedez being indicted in NJ?

Most of them, if not all, are crooks. Don't trust a thing they said. Their goals are to gain power, to get bacons home(their own homes, not home districts). We should vote for whoever promise not to raise our taxes. It's better that we keep our own money than they take ours. If each person vote for his/her own interest, then the majority interest will be served. Of course the individual's interest includes the interest to keep the country safe, to keep the economy growing, to keep one's tax down, or the interest to thwart Bush out of spite.

Posted by: ic at October 26, 2006 12:59 AM

They are, hopefully, going the way of the Whigs -- but they don't have the prospect of becoming the Republican party.

Posted by: jd watson at October 26, 2006 5:31 AM

All you "conservatives" who want to vote Dem to "send a message," if you save the Democratic Party from the disaster they so richly deserve, I'm holding YOU responsible for all the future damage they do.

Yeah, YOU.

Posted by: Bob Hawkins at October 26, 2006 10:55 AM

It will be interesting to see Carville and the Forehead (Begala) do their spinning after this election. If the GOP holds both houses, my first question to Carville would be - "So, when are you switching?"

Posted by: jim hamlen at October 26, 2006 11:07 AM

Jefferson, Reid, Menendez

Don't for get Mulhollon, or John "unindicted co-conspirator" Murtha, or Alcee Hastings. To those who say there's no difference, then explain why GOP crooks have the decency to resign and serve their time when they get caught.


(And what ever happend to "60-40"?)

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at October 26, 2006 11:28 AM

If the Democrat control the next congress, all they will be able to do is pass compromise budgets and conduct pointless investigations.

Posted by: Brandon at October 26, 2006 12:02 PM

It'd be more interesting to see a Dem Congress try to do anything against a GW Bush who doesn't have to get anybody elected or even please anybody. This 2008 Presidential Election is a whole new ballgame that has not been seen since at least 1952.

Posted by: Brad S at October 26, 2006 12:12 PM

The match-up is even the same. An intellectual from IL who appeals mainly to Eastern elites vs an avuncular military guy liked by folks in both parties.

Posted by: oj at October 26, 2006 12:21 PM

How can Obama beat Hillary in New Hampshire?

Posted by: Bob at October 26, 2006 1:08 PM

Get himself elected governor of MA.

Posted by: oj at October 26, 2006 1:48 PM

I guess I misunderstood you, OJ. The intellectual from Illinois is Hillary? I thought you meant Obama since he is D-Illinois. I associate HRC with Arkansas or NY though I know she grew up in Illinois.

Posted by: Bob at October 27, 2006 12:01 AM

Obama?

Please.

Great White Hope.

Posted by: Sandy P at October 27, 2006 1:10 AM
« NOTHING TO FEAR... (via Lou Gots): | Main | DIALOGUE ROLLING: »