Posted on 08/07/2006 9:55:36 AM PDT by Reagan Man
Minneapolis, Minnesota: Members of the Republican National Committee awakened this morning to read gloomy news in the Minneapolis Star Tribune: as the RNC closed its summer meeting at the Sheraton Bloomington Hotel, two of the nation's most-quoted political prognosticators told the Star Tribune concluded that signs were ominous that the GOP would lose its majority in the House and could also lose their edge in the U.S. Senate this November.
"An electoral rout" is what independent political analyst Charles Cook said Republicans could face in the fall. Cook lists fifteen GOP House seats (and no Democratic-held seats) as toss-ups--or precisely the number that Democrats need to retake the House majority for the first time in twelve years. University of Virginia analyst Larry Sabato -- easily the most-quoted prognosticator in America--forecast that "Republicans are headed for their most serious midterm losses in decades." Along with fellow UVA analyst David Wasserman, Sabato expects Democrats to gain 12-to-15 seats in the House (up from a forecast of a net gain of six-to-eight last month) and a gain of three-to-six seats in the Senate (up from two-to-three last month).
To this "gloom and doom" forecast from the "experts," grass-roots GOP leaders responded almost in unison with "Nuts to you!"
Noting that Cook, Sabato, and Company are basing their predictions on nationwide poll numbers on President Bush and the Republicans, South Dakota GOP National Committeeman Ron Schmidt told me: "All politics is local and in our state, those national numbers just don't transfer."
Nebraska GOP National Committeeman Hal Daub also disputed the gloomy forecasts. "We have a great economy and great President," said Daub, a former U.S. Representative and mayor of Omaha, "We just need to get positive, get off negative, and play offense." He went on to charge that Republicans would have a triumphant off-year election because "we have a different conviction of principles than the Democrats. They may not know it now, but their rhetoric may lead to a permanent minority status for the Democratic Party and their conduct will do it. [Democratic National Chairman]Howard Dean doesn't get it!"
Dr. Doug McKinney, newly-elected state party chairman in West Virginia, noted that the President won his state over John Kerry by a big margin ("My people weren't fooled by Kerry's hunting trip to Ohio") and predicted a good off-year results in the Mountaineer State. "We have a lot of DINO's [Democrats in Name Only] where I come from," McKinney told me.
Several other RNC members said the "experts" were off because they were, as Schmidt told me, not taking into account local issues and personalities that transcend the national scene. "This election is about the leadership of our Republican governor, Linda Lingle, who took a $150 million deficit after Democrats were in the governorship for 43 years and, in four years, has turned it into a $600 million surplus," said Sam Aiona, state Republican chairman of Hawaii. "There's obviously a real difference between Democratic and Republican leadership in Hawaii. The U.S. economy is strong, the Hawaiian economy is strong, and the pocketbook issues favor Republicans."
Aiona also pointed out that Democratic turnout is usually driven by the state's senior senator, Daniel Inouye, "who usually comes out on TV five days before the election urging Democrats to come to the polls. Now he's out three months before the election urging a big turnout. That gives you an indication of how close things are."
Illinois Republican National Committeeman Mary Jo Arndt, who began reading HUMAN EVENTS by giving annual subscriptions to her Bridge Club for $1 a year under a special offer in 1964 ("to help Barry Goldwater, my hero"), also said the party is in strong shape in her state because "a lot of Democrats are very unhappy." She cited the nationally-watched race for president of the Cook County (Chicago) Board of Supervisors, in which ailing and unseen incumbent John Stroger blessed his son Todd to replace him as the Democratic nominee this fall and the county Democratic committee went along with it -- upsetting other ambitious Democrats. According to Arndt, "[Republican]nominee Tony Peraica has a great chance to win and there is great enthusiasm for him, as there is for Peter Garza, our nominee for Cook County sheriff. People want to see more intergrity in public officials."
Perhaps the most poignant rejoinder to Cook, Sabato, and Company came from Californias' GOP National Committeeman Tim Morgan. "At this time in 1998 [the last closing mid-term election of an eight-year presidency]. Republicans thought they would win thirty more seats. And they thought that right up to a few days before the election and then they lost seats. So who knows?
I wouldn't be so sure. They might gain some seats, and even then I wouldn't necessarily bet the ranch.
When reading about doom and gloom for us look for two or three "tip off" items. If there is a reliance on generic polls the writer is an ash hole. If there is a reference to Florida as a "swing state" the writer is trying to put one over on us. If the write fails to mention rats jim marshall, chet edwards, alan molohan, jim barrows and stephanie herseth, he/she is a lying POS.
Can't see any GOP voters going for the dems
The problem is
They might stay home
OR
A big influx of new Dem voters from those who didn't bother to vote before
You're correct. My mistake.
Newt's Contract With America gave GOP candidates a clearly defined conservative campaign agenda to rally around and run on in 1994. The Democrats ran on their standard liberal agenda of tax increases, spending increases and social liberalism. American voters were impressed with the CWA and voted for Republicans giivng them a 54 seat pickup. The results speak for themselves. Newt may have taken a hard fall five years later, but the CWA was a resounding success story.
Newt`s strategy was to nationalize the election in 1994 and for the most part I believe he succeeded. Consider this. In 1994 the Pew and Gallup pre-election polls had the GOP overtaking the Dems in the final month of the campaign. Perhaps the CWA did have a big influence on voters.
Whether the GOP`s message got out by way of the CWA or as individual issues from the overall GOP campaign agenda, the message got out nonetheless. Clinton was always a strong inspiration for conservatives of all stripes, especailly for gun owners. How many of the 54 House seats the GOP gained were produced by the CWA? Who knows. But to not give credit to Newt Gingrich for his long term effort in FINALLY making the GOP THE majority party in American politics for the first time in 40 years, is to ignore the historic results of the 1994 election itself. The CWA was a significant factor in the GOP winning control of the House.
>>>>Hell even Bill Clinton admitted the GUN CONTROL issue cost the dems the house in 94 .Add in the Christian Conservatives and it became a rout.
And you expected Clinton to say that Newt's CWA beat the Dems? LOL I don't think so. Gun owners, Christian conservatives, small government-tax reform fiscal conservatives, they ALL contributed to the GOP beating the Dems in 1994. Even Ronald Reagan played a role. Dick Armey and Newt wrote most of the CWA based on some of Reagan's speeches from the 1980`s which contained some principled conservative rhetoric. Call it, unfinished business.
Keep thinking Newt Did it
If it makes you happy
But it was the gun owners and Christian Conservatives angered at Clinton
And as I posted delusional Newt predicted a gain of 25-30 seats in 98 and the GOP lost seats because some of the CC stayed home
Murtha's going down in flames. That's why you won't see any polls on that race.
How does the Reuters scandal play into it? Isn't Reuters a foreign company?
History trumps revisionism.
Ain't revisionism it is truth pure and simple
You want to live in your Newt Dream World be my guest
Bill Clinton was responsible for 94 not Newt
If you want to live in the outer limits of the revisionist twilight zone, have at it.
Nope don't want to infringe on your turf
LOL
Reuters news doesn't permeate the U.S. press? Also, if you think the problem is just with Reuters you are kidding yourself. This scandal will bleed into the AP and local rags
Reuters news doesn't permeate the U.S. press? Also, if you think the problem is just with Reuters you are kidding yourself. This scandal will bleed into the AP and local rags
Case in point...
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.