Posted on 10/14/2008 8:34:25 AM PDT by St. Louis Conservative
Here are our latest House ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain of 25-30 seats.
Any seats not listed are currently considered to be at limited risk for the incumbent party. For our race-by-race analysis, you must subscribe to the print edition of the Report.
(Excerpt) Read more at rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com ...
In April, after McCain secured his nomination, I was predicting Obama winning with about 300 EV, D 57 - R 43 Senate (D +6) and D 253 - R 182 House (D +20).
Unfortunately, now this looks like a best case scenario. The Dems are likely to have 58-59 Senate seats, and can actually get to 60-61 if they break through in some of GA/KY/MS/TX southern defense line.
In the House, holding the losses to under 25 seats will be very difficult. If we lose 30-32 or so, we’ll get D 265 - R 170 House, in which even the Blue Dog dems will be all but irrelevant, and Obama/Pelosi can push any legislation with no opposition.
In other words, welcome to New Deal 2.0
So in your view, anyone who has been here a short time and doesn’t believe EVERY single poll is wrong is a “troll”, huh. I was hoping we could have a more enlightening and thoughtful discourse here.
Most Republican HOUSE members voted against the bailout. My Congressman voted against it twice. Why, then, should I vote against him?
The gop didnt even bother to field a candidate for senate or congress in arkansas. It appears to me they want to lose. Maybe its to hand off the mess to the dems and swoop in like saviors in 4 years. I am sick of this frilling game.
Relax. If you are not in fact a troll, the application of Troll-Be-Gone spray will have absolutely no harmful effects.
If Republicans lose 30 House seats then it is hard to see how McCain could even have a chance. Even if he wins he won’t be able to govern. If his presidency is a failure I suppose we are looking at more losses in 2010. That is perhaps the only up side to 0bama winning. If things go down the toilet as we expect them to then the GOP could stage a comeback in ‘10, if they get their act together.
If Repubs are down to the 160 range though then it would take a tidal wave far bigger than the one in ‘94 to get them even close to majority status again. Hard to see that happening.
Why is it when people post reality you guys turn the script and shoot the messenger. I would not have posted this myself because I know the backlash I would receive. I don’t know why we can’t have differing opinions and I am sure mine is not much different than yours.
You shouln’t. I wouldn’t vote against John Shadegg even though he voted for it the second time around, however the latest media spin is that the bailout vote (and of course the market turmoil) is killing the Republicans.
Dem House majorities in 80-100 seats were the norm in 1970-1994. I think the best Congress Reagan had came after his 1984 landslide, and the House still had a 70-seat Dem majority. In 1990, the majority grew to 100, D 267 - R 167.
Somehow, Reagan and Bush-41 managed to work in these circumstances.
Gingrich’s accomplishment in 1994 was incredible, it is so annoying that he is underappreciated by many in the party.
“WTF is going on here? Is the bailout vote only hurting Republicans? What about all the Dems that voted for the bailout? WTF!!!! “
What is going on is that when things are going bad people like to take it out on the party that controls the White House.
“The approval ratings for the dem majority congress have been in the single digits for the past two years and they gain seats? Yes, that makes perfect sense.”
That is a generic rating though. Americans of all stripes have an amazing ability to hate congress but think they have one of the few good guys.
One reason they won in ‘94 was because they had a very strong leader in Gingrich, who was considered a visionary at the time. In 2010 though, I don’t think Boehner is the man for the job. That is discouraging. Still even if the GOP gains enough seats in 2 years so the Dems are nervous about 2012, it could cause some fracturing in their party. If 0bama is not popular as president then ‘12 will be a year to pick up a lot of Senate seats too.
This is all assuming we will have fair and free elections in 2012.
Thank you for being the arbiter of "reality" around here!
Noobs who post nothing but negative poll data (while claiming to be rock ribbed conservatives) spring up every election cycle and then vanish after election day.
You'll both be gone soon.
“Why are you trashing someone for posting something you don’t like? Not everyone here has their head in the sand hoping it isn’t true. Trying to make the case that Republicans aren’t going to get crushed is a tough case to make with absolutely NO polling data that shows good news.
I don’t know how this will end up, but the hard evidence doesn’t bode well”.
1. Check when “St. Louis Conservative” signed up for FR.
2. Polls are not even close to “hard evidence.”
3. Get a grip!
I suppose the reaction of Bush, McCain, and even Palin in NOT placing the mess squarely on the Dems where it belongs gives an impression that this is indeed a “bipartisan” issue. For them not to do as Truman did and run against the “do nothing Congress” fails to paint Pelosi, Reid, and their ilk as the bad guys in this.
Regarding projections though, CQ.com, which seems quite even handed, has a slightly more optimistic projection. As of now at least. They have Republicans ahead or leaning in 179 districts. Pretty sad considering 4 years ago they had over 230. But that 179 has another 21 districts as a tossup. If we win a lot of those then the numbers are not so bad. They could be within striking distance of taking back a majority in 2 years, if things head downhill under President 0bama.
Having said that, at this time in 2006, CQ still showed Republicans well ahead in many districts that ended up falling, like Bradley’s seat in NH, Ryun in KS, etc.
you never know, how long I have been here.
hmm, I guess I will take your word for it and retract my statements, I usually dont bother to look at what they have posted before, because I am not out to get someone banned.
McCain is really ahead but Zogby, Gallup, Rasmussen, Battleground, Hotline, Fox Opinion, IBD have all conspired to be WRONG. Because being wrong does wonders for their future.
And the overwhelming media blitz that Obama has been maintaining for months is really a figment of our imagination. McCain has really outspent Obama and is using reverse psychology to make everyone vote for him by watching Obama commercials nonstop in VA, IN, CO and FL.
And all those pesky polls that show Republican candidates behind coast to coast are part of the grand conspiracy.
Whew, I'm glad I've seen the light.
Okay, I’m not calling the pollsters liars. I’m just going to pose the question of how one casts a cold, sober, objective eye on the performance of the current congressional majority and particularly of its leadership and says to oneself with a straight face, “You’re doin’ a heck of a job, folks! In fact, here’s more just like you!”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.