Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Novak - "GOP will lose 27-30 seats..."
Rightalk.com ^ | 8-25-06 | Bob J

Posted on 08/25/2006 12:40:57 PM PDT by Bob J

In an Election 2006 conference sponsored by Paul Weyrich and the Free Congess Foundation this afternoon, panelist Robert Novak stated that based on his and others significant research he believed the GOP would lose between 27-30 seats in the House this fall.

Other panelists inlcuded John Fund, Kate O'Bierne and John Gizzy. A replay of the one hour conference can be heard at www.Rightalk.com , which webcast the event. click on "The Right Hour" logo.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2006; novak; predictions; rightalk
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-230 next last
To: Torie

For incumbents, I might chose Chocola's race as the single best indicator. Drake would be my second choice. Pryce would be my third choice. The other choices high on the list don't fit either because their district voted for Kerry or they face a rematch from a previous popular incumbent who held the seat previously or because the incumbent has other unique unfavorables that make him vulnerable not related to national environment. These 3 are arguably the most vulnerable of the ones that are in the fight of their life only because it is 2006.


201 posted on 08/25/2006 8:48:55 PM PDT by crasher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Bob J
NOTE - It will only take a move of 15 seats to give the dems a majority. If this happens it will effectively put the dems in the majority position the pubs enjoy right now.

I'm not so sure how much they "enjoy" having the majority. Most of them certainly don't handle it well.

202 posted on 08/25/2006 8:52:45 PM PDT by jamaly (I evacuate early and often!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: crasher

Good choices. Reasonably competent incumbents from marginal districts, in seats that seem this time to reflect the GOP problems that exist in many places.


203 posted on 08/25/2006 8:59:37 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Torie; Clintonfatigued; AuH2ORepublican

I think as it stands now, worst case, we lose 10 House seats, though I'd have to go and count state by state to see. Problem is, a lot of it is gut feeling and guesswork, simply because I have too little info on so many races, and what is there is often flawed or questionable. The media is often johnny-on-the-spot with highlighting supposedly vulnerable Republicans (or doing their damndest to make them vulnerable) while blatantly ignoring potentially vulnerable Dems. I'd imagine if our beloved Murtha in PA were a Republican, we'd be seeing polling data on a weekly basis, but since he isn't, he's ignored and presumed "safe." Same goes for others like Mollohan, et al.


204 posted on 08/25/2006 9:07:20 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Cheney X -- Destroying the Liberal Democrat Traitors By Any Means Necessary -- Ya Dig ? Sho 'Nuff.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

A reasonable worst case at the moment would be 1 loss in NH, 2-3 losses in Conn, 2 losses in NY, 2-3 losses in PA, 2-3 losses in Ohio, 2-3 losses in Indiana, 1 loss in Illinois, 1 is Wisconsin, 1 in Iowa, 1 in Minnesota, 1-2 in Colorado, 1 in NM, 1 in Arizona, 1 in Texas, 1 in Florida, 1 in NC, 1 in Virginia, 1 in Kentucky, and maybe 1 in Wyoming, and maybe 1 Washington. Some more seats are in play, and I am typing off the cuff, and may have missed some, but in any event, add it up.


205 posted on 08/25/2006 9:17:29 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: capt. norm
Only ONE of these guys is Robert Novak:

and he could use one of these .....

The
The "Get Smart" cone of silence

206 posted on 08/25/2006 9:20:33 PM PDT by Optimist (I think I'm beginning to see a pattern here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Coop

LOL... good one Coop.


207 posted on 08/25/2006 10:16:27 PM PDT by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte

The Rehnquist thing I remember. Definitely an egg-on-face moment.

But I think we have to ask how he stacks up prophet-wise against other pundits.


208 posted on 08/25/2006 10:32:25 PM PDT by California Patriot ("That's not Charlie the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Torie; AntiGuv; Clintonfatigued; AuH2ORepublican

Yup, that'd be 30 seats. I just don't see, now at least, the bulk of those materializing.

My most optimistic has it as follows:
AL-FL, no change
GA, +2 GOP (Burns & Collins)
HA, +1 GOP (Kawananakoa)
IL, +1 GOP (reclaim Crane seat)
IN, no change
IA, +1 GOP (defeat of Boswell)
KS-KY, no change
LA, +1 GOP (defeat of Melancon)
ME-MI, no change
MN, +1 GOP (if Ellison the Muslim gets the nod in the 5th)
MS-ND, no change
OH, +1 GOP (Strickland open seat)
OK-OR, no change
PA, loss of Sherwood, defeat of Murtha (no change)
SC, +1 GOP (defeat of Spratt)
SD, no change
TN, +1 GOP (upset in the 9th by a White Republican)
TX, loss of DeLay seat because of write-in mess, defeat of Chet Edwards (no change)
UT, no change
VT, +1 GOP (Rainville win of open seat)
VA-WA, no change
WV, +1 GOP (Wakim defeats Mollohan)
WI-WY, no change

That would have us gaining 12 seats (14 if Sherwood stays and Dr. Shelley Winters Marla Gibbs wins the write-in), the very "best case" scenario for us with House races. Of course, not likely, but it's good to be optimistic for a change. ;-)


209 posted on 08/25/2006 10:50:13 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Cheney X -- Destroying the Liberal Democrat Traitors By Any Means Necessary -- Ya Dig ? Sho 'Nuff.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

That is an optimistic count. :)


210 posted on 08/25/2006 10:53:17 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Red6
Even a liberal Alaskan Governor is still conservative by Massachusetts or Californian standards.

Same here in Tennessee. Governor Bredesen (D) even kicked a bunch of moochers off the gov gravy train. LOL

211 posted on 08/25/2006 10:56:27 PM PDT by beckysueb (KOmmies are really nothing but DUmmies with better PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia

Excellent post


212 posted on 08/25/2006 11:06:25 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Bob J

Didn't Novak say a similar thing in 2002 and 2004?

I am not sure that this loser Novak prediction is credible.


213 posted on 08/25/2006 11:22:38 PM PDT by GregH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie; AuH2ORepublican; Clintonfatigued; AntiGuv; Kuksool

What's really remarkable is that there are far more seats than my quick "optimistic" overview that ought be targeted and are certainly winnable for us, and we're not doing it.

I'd certainly think it is feasible for us to have every district Dubya got better than 45% in (as often many local GOP Congressmembers will outperform the President). Based on Dubya's weakest performance in 2000 (applied to the '02 seats), that would still be a whopping 270 seats.

If you look at the average number of seats the Democrats held from 1933-1995 (removing 1947-49 & 1953-55), it was around 265 seats. Conversely, including those two years we previously held Congress, and everything after 1995, we've only averaged 229 seats. It's why it always seems a bit tougher for us that we haven't had the kind of extra insulation that the 'Rats had for a large part of their run, but there ought not to be anything stopping us from padding ours for a change. It's outrageous we haven't gone above 236 members since before the 1948 elections. Prior to the '94 loss of Congress, the Democrats never went BELOW 236 since 1957-58 (and for 6 election cycles, they held more than 290 seats, the last as recently as 1975-79).


214 posted on 08/25/2006 11:43:49 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Cheney X -- Destroying the Liberal Democrat Traitors By Any Means Necessary -- Ya Dig ? Sho 'Nuff.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
I got down to No. 50 on this thread and nobody even came close to getting the basic facts right -- about par for the course on FR these days.

So what took you so long? I'm glad to hear some more details provided, but my already low opinion of Bob Novak hasn't changed a bit.

215 posted on 08/26/2006 5:44:53 AM PDT by Coop (No, there are no @!%$&#*! polls on Irey vs. Murtha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Ogie Oglethorpe
I'm sure I'll now be accused of being a seminar poster for daring to believe that the almighty GOP could possibly lose ground. :-)

Oh, knock off your whining. FR has done NOTHING BUT discuss the demise of the "almighty GOP" for six months.

216 posted on 08/26/2006 5:47:59 AM PDT by Coop (No, there are no @!%$&#*! polls on Irey vs. Murtha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Ogie Oglethorpe
If it wasn't for the judges, there would be no reason to have the Senate - the number of solid GOP senators can be counted on one hand.

That's like saying if it wasn't for the oxygen, there'd be no reason to have the atmosphere.

217 posted on 08/26/2006 5:49:16 AM PDT by Coop (No, there are no @!%$&#*! polls on Irey vs. Murtha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

There are now two generic polls showing a dead heat. Plus the generic trend over the past two months has been all GOP. You can comfortably believe the Pubbies have the momentum. What that translates into this November remains to be seen.


218 posted on 08/26/2006 5:50:27 AM PDT by Coop (No, there are no @!%$&#*! polls on Irey vs. Murtha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: fewz

If I'm a Democrat, at least I'm still far more knowledgeable on the upcoming elections than you.


219 posted on 08/26/2006 5:51:22 AM PDT by Coop (No, there are no @!%$&#*! polls on Irey vs. Murtha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: wolf24

My tagline is the result of hundreds of people wandering onto Irey threads immediately saying "Are there any polls?"


220 posted on 08/26/2006 5:53:13 AM PDT by Coop (No, there are no @!%$&#*! polls on Irey vs. Murtha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-230 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson