Will The GOP Lose the House

Reality Versus The Gut

By Erick Posted in Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Behind the scenes, a growing number of incumbent Republicans are fearing a disaster in November. A lot are starting to think they will lose the House majority and some privately want the loss, thinking a loss is the only way the GOP will find its way again. The problem will be whether the GOP MOC's think the end of the world has arrive or whether they think there is still a chance to do something about it.

If you only read one thing (besides RedState) today, read Jay Cost. Jay and I are right at the same point. We both think the GOP is going to lose some seats. But we do not see the GOP losing the majority yet. As always, Jay is more articulate than me.

My intuition is that a great deal of summer polling is indeed invalid in this way - because, even though pollsters try to eliminate non-voters from the sample, they are harder to spot so far from Election Day. Almost everybody is "paying attention to the campaign" right now because there is no campaign right now. Almost everybody claims that they will vote right now, but it is easy to claim you will do something when you have 90 days until you actually have to do it. If the pollsters are not spotting the non-voters, any question about party preference in November would probably be invalid in the same way.

« When Negative Ads BackfireComments (4) | WaPo to GOP: You Are Doomed, Part IIComments (24) »
Will The GOP Lose the House 20 Comments (0 topical, 20 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

I think it's silly to think that these guys will suddenly listen to the base after a loss, when common sense dictates that they will use the minority status to be all things to all people, pandering even MORE when they have the luxury of being in the opposition.

And let's not forget: the RMSPers are dying for a chance to claim that "You extremists have wrecked it, come to the 'center' and win again." Remember Christine Whitman's book "It's My Party, Too?" that came out in early 2005 on the hopes that President Bush would lose in 2004? My guess is at least one liberal Republican has a book ready to come out in January 2007.

"In this day and age, you're not going to get a fair shake in the media" -- Lance Armstrong

Even if we do not lose the house, we all need to remind our representatives why we are in this situation to begin with. The abandonment of core conservative principles is the culprit here.

When I turned 18 and started following politics in 1993, the draw of our party was (to me) the plethora of great new ideas. I cannot help but feel we have drifted towards becoming the "me too" party by adopting many of the politicies I abhorred a decade ago. Sad, very sad.

Conservatism wins everytime it is tried. So too often we have gotten off track, concerned more with power than the education it took to get that power in 1994.

Some losses may be helpful to the long term strategy, provided they do not impact our majority. However, specific attention should be paid to the issues which turned voters against Republican incumbents/candidates. This will rule out individual anomalies and provide a better sense of how the party should adjust. This will separate individuals playing politics with our safety, adopting wayward positions or dishonestly cloaking themselves in conservative platitudes while voting conversely.

I still believe strongly that Ben Nelson’s campaign shows we are very strong on the defense issue. He has been daedal regarding the crafting of positions on Iraq, defense and surveillance issues. Accordingly, Mr. Nelson has avoided any direct, sustained criticism from the DNC, which appears specious given their overall platform. However, his voter base is conservative, requires this appeal and losing the seat would not be an acceptable loss to the Democrat Party.

Examining the dichotomy between Nelson and Lieberman, one can only amplify and expose the frailty and dishonest nature of Democrat Party argumentation.

"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"

political parties are becoming more and more irrelevant. Many more independants making up thier mind nearer to the end of a campaign. More party cross over voting. Maybe even a higher voter turnout this fall.

The world is all that is the case.

Until the combined Republican-Democratic ticket starts losing partisan elections, they're not at all becoming irrelevant.

How many of those 'independents' take advantage of it when state law and state party committees allow independents to vote in partisan primaries?

And I defy you to show a trend of turnout improvement.
"In this day and age, you're not going to get a fair shake in the media" -- Lance Armstrong

That while independents may provide the last leg of a campaign, they will go wherever the momentum is. If conservatives are running strong and have momentum on their side the independents will flock to them since indies tend to gravitate to whoever they percieve to be a winner.

Save the planet, Kill yourself

That I stand up for Australian table wine

"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill

Enjoyed it last night myself. Then again, Eric Idle made quip remark some time ago.

the other day that the Democrats lack the cash to pull off a 1994. I have no clue what will happen, but it does appear that it would require a national tidal wave to get the Democrats to majority status.

the Democrats winning the majority in the House would lie in the impeachment process. We would spend the next two years watching the House bring about impeachment proceedings, while the terrorists laugh at the state of our Union. Nothing would get done and we would be in greater danger than at any time since 9/11.

I prefer not to take on the defeatist attitude of the Democrats and hope for defeat to "teach the Republican leadership a lesson." Better to communicate concerns LOUD AND CLEAR to our Republican leadership.

Nothing is getting done right now. Hell Republicans couldn't even pass an imigration reform plan with Democrats supporting it.

is whether or not the models of true population used for the predictions is correct. The posts I vaguely recall indicated there was a Democrat advantage in predictive polls because in a population where the actual breakdown of the population based on voter registration was 30% Dem, 29% Rep, rest elsewhere with largest being Independant, the pollsters were using a 38% Dem, 31% Rep model. IIRC, this was indpendent of the non-voter problem Mr. Cost is disucssing.

My numbers may be off because I don't have the data to reference.

Or at least get REAL close to losing it. Not the Senate though.

Republicans for Environmental Protection

But I think that as the election gets closer, the Dems will probably fall short of the House. That said, I expect the GOP will probably be without Santorum in the Senate and Musgrave in the House.

I expect the GOP will probably pick up three or four seats in the House. They reclaim Phil Crane's district, for instance, and Irey beats Murtha. Figure one or two other seats go their way in exchange for losing Musgrave.

The Senate will have better numbers for the GOP. Burns will hold on, I think, but Santorum will lose (I'm going to assume the Dems knock the Green party off the ballot). The GOP takes Michigan, Washington, and the open seat in Minnesota. After Lieberman wins, the Dems will go a lot further than expected and exclude him from their caucas rather than anger the DailyKos types. Ultimately, Lieberman will end up caucasing with the GOP.

though I do think they will hold both the House and Senate, but only by very slender margins. If one house is lost it will be the House not the Senate. But even if that happens it gives the next GOP presidential candidate good fuel for 2008 as he will be able to run against a radical, do-nothing Congress.

Mr. Cost's analysis of polling is excellent. It's a basic fact of American politics. Non-voters lean toward Democrats, which is another way of saying that Republicans are more likely to vote.

Still, Republicans face serious challenges in November, and it's important to stress that only with an all-out effort can the GOP hope to maintain control. And so far, we haven't seen that effort.

Too Cool for Words

snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They are going to find one way or another to implode this coming election season. I think the GOP majorities in the House and Senate are safe for the forseable future; this coming election cycle at the very least. Besides, the low turnout for the elections held thus far (primaries and special elections) are hardly indicative of a roused up electorate the Dems are hoping would create a tidal wave they could ride back to power.

Polls tend to favor the Democrats early. You can analyze methodology to explain this, but the polls in recent years have tended to overestimate Democratic votes.

The historical average of Presidents' second midterms is one of heavy losses for their party, averaging a swing of 53 seats in the House and seven or eight in the Senate. 1998 was the only "second midterm" where the President's party gained in both houses of Congress.

Obviously, this year is not going to be close to the averages. Minor losses in the House, probably a net of six lost, and a breakeven or -1 in the Senate. The polls are right about Bush's unpopularity and general voter dissatisfaction. The Democrats should be winning handily across the board.

They have a problem, though. The far left, antiwar, anti-defense wing has gained such dominance in the party organization and donor base that elected officials are afraid to stand up to them. If the Democrats were credible on fighting terrorism and managing security and defense issues, they would be kicking butt and taking names.

After the election, someone should remember to send Kos a "Thank You" card.

Given that we've only had four second midterm Congressional elections in the last 30 years, and one of them came a month after Richard Nixon's resignation, I don't think the average is meaningful enough to worry me.
"In this day and age, you're not going to get a fair shake in the media" -- Lance Armstrong

Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)

©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service