Replies

Much of this strikes me as a large load of horse whatever.

In 1994, we had several factors which we don't have now:

1. We had just had redistricting, often delayed by two years in the courts. The districts we currently have have been stable for some time.

2. Haley Barbour and others had done good recruiting. They found enough "good" candidates that when a voter wanted change, they could pick one of these guys. (By "good" I mean that they looked like they should be in the same ballpark as the incumbent. Not by ideology, but by demeanor, presence, brains, whatever.) I see no evidence that the DNC has done a good job of recruitment on a large scale.

3. Gingrich and crew "nationalized" the election, in a real way. The democrats haven't done it. "Hate Bush" isn't it. With Dean/Reid/Pelosi trying to do a Gingrich, you've got guaranteed failure here.

4. Things should be leaked as "bad". If you aren't running scared, you are running stupid.

So I won't relax, but just because a lot of people are wetting their pants wrt the election doesn't mean I will.

Yet.

Gingrich and crew "nationalized" the election, in a real way

Nope your reasons are all incorrect and this is the most incorrect one although Newt still thinks he did it. He is political boob who predicted 25 or more seats in 98 for the GOP

Bill Clinton won the house and senate for the GOP with his Gun Control--Gays in the military and abortion policies
The Gun Owners were outraged as well as the Christian Conservatives and they turned out in droves

Exit polling showed that the vast majority of voters didn't even know what Gingrich's Contract With America was