Dems cheer House poll (Poll says Seven Republican members could be defeated)

The Hill ^ | June 16, 2005 | Josephine Hearn

[atlanta67]

I would be surprised if David Drier lost, but i suppose it is possible

[SBprone]

What I've read about Duke sounds real bad. If he did what I think he did the pubbies will have to find somebody else to run for his seat.

[COEXERJ145]

Amazing how so many on here sem to relish a DEM victory in 2006. I guess these are the same "conservatives" who want to see Bush impeached.

Most are just angry people who hate the Republican Party because it doesn't agree with them on their pet issue or because the party ran off Pat Buchanan and his ilk.

[atlanta67]

Actually ive noticed that.

When the Presidents approval goes down it is always because the President doesnt/hasnt done something they want or support.

I also noticed the prevailing attitude by many is Santorum is going to lose because he didnt support Toomey, rather than he is going to lose becasue he is probably too conservative for a rather Blue State. BTW Toomy would ahve lost in the General Election. A few hundred thousand Kerry voters would have had to vote Toomey in order for him to win.

[Logic n' Reason]

Amazing how so many on here sem to relish a DEM victory in 2006. I guess these are the same "conservatives" who want to see Bush impeached.

Don't go putting words in folk's mouths!

If the reps loose big in '06 it will be because they did (and have done) nothing to stop the dems.

If (dare I say when) the dems take back control of both houses in '06, it won't be because they've done anything to earn it; it will be because the reps. simply did nothing.

No one said anything at all about impeaching the President.

[BlackRazor]

The Republicans took control of Congress in 1994 after the Democrats rammed through the largest tax increase in history and a gun control bill, and got caught with their hands in the House Bank. Then the Republicans brilliantly came up with the Contract for America, which every single GOP House candidate signed.

All of those things may have contributed, but IMO, the biggest factor was the redistricting effort after the 1990 census. Republicans finally had enough clout in state legislatures for the first time in a long time, that they were able to unravel some long-standing Democrat-engineered gerrymanders that had given Democrats overrepresentation in the House. Also, southern Democrats were complicit in gerrymandering minority districts that served their purpose in electing more minorities to congress, but at the same time diluted Democrat strength in the resulting non-minority districts.

Under the new redistricting maps, the GOP was in a position to make significant congressional gains. We started to see this in 1992, when the Republicans gained 9 House seats, despite George H. W. Bush dragging down the ticket.

All the things you mentioned helped, but the Republican takeover of Congress was really engineered through favorable redistricting. Whatever issues the Democrats may have in 2006, that is one critical element they won't have.

[atlanta67]

well if the Dems win the House in 2006, they will impeach Bush....Senate will never convict....it will actualyl backfire big time on the Dems in 2008....I predict Hillary will be nowhere near impeachment

[planekT]

They will point to this poll when they (the dems) lose 7 Seats as proof of voter fraud.