Posted on 04/22/2006 5:02:11 AM PDT by Carl/NewsMax
National Republicans may pay a huge price for not doing more to oppose Hillary Clinton's Senate reelection bid this year.
In fact, it may cost them control of the House.
Bloomberg News reports that the former first lady, along with Democratic gubernatorial candidate Eliot Spitzer, now lead their opponents by such wide margins that their coattails could help Democrats "pick up as many as six New York congressional seats - more than one-third of the 15 they need nationally to gain a House majority."
Lee Miringoff, director of the Institute for Public Opinion at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, agrees that Clinton and Spitzer victories could have national consequences.
"It could turn into a Democratic year in New York, which might then have an impact on down-ballot races for Congress," he explained.
Even absent the New York factor, Republicans are already deeply worried that the House could go Democrat - a prospect that White House spokeswoman Mary Matalin described on Thursday as "catastrophic."
Add a Hillary Clinton landslide into the equation and Republican hopes grow considerably dimmer, at least if Miringoff's calculations hold true.
With so much on the line, one would expect the national GOP to be working overtime to boost Clinton's challenger, former Yonkers Mayor John Spencer. Even if he didn't win, a closer race might help preserve precious congressional seats for the GOP.
But outside of a brief critique of Mrs. Clinton "brittleness" delivered by Karl Rove earlier this year, the Bush White House is acting like they have nothing at stake in the New York race.
That's particularly odd, because if Dems take over the House, future House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has already indicated that impeachment will be at the top of his agenda.
The conservative media hasn't been much better. After Jeanine Pirro's challenge fizzled in December, most pundits have treated Mrs. Clinton's reelection as a forgone conclusion.
Even though recent polls show Spencer gaining on Clinton, he's gotten almost no exposure on talk radio and cable TV - and print interviews have been slim to none.
That's not because Spencer has nothing to say - his comments to NewsMax earlier this year show he's ready to go after Hillary hammer and tong.
Still, Republican Party activists seem content to have Mrs. Clinton's reelection devolve into a coronation.
That's fine - as long they don't complain too loudly if Democrats take back the House based on a handful of seats won in New York - effectively putting an end to the Bush presidency.
Sweeney and McHugh's districts are too Republican for the incumbents to lose absent a big scandal. The Republican Senate didn't draw McHugh's district to look like an elephant and Sweeney's district to look like an old, shrunken boot for the fun of it; the districts were drawn to reelect the incumbents for as long as they run and to give the GOP a serious advantage in an open-seat situation.
President Bush got 54% in Sweeney's CD in 2004, with Sweeney getting 66%. In McHugh's CD, President Bush got "only" 51% (which in the Northeast is actually a very good score; the Democrats do not hold any districts in Maine, NH, Vermont, Mass., RI, NY, NJ, CT, Eastern PA, Delaware or Maryland in which President Bush got 50% or more) but McHugh got 71%. If the Democrats throw a lot of money into those races (instead of in other districts), it will likely reduce the total number of House seats they can pick up.
it won't look like that this time - she will win alot of those upstate counties, they are hollowed out up there of any republican voters.
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.