Posted on 10/31/2006 8:09:22 AM PST by LS
[Here are the key paragraphs. Go to the link for the full article]
Besides Bush's residual popularity in some crucial states and districts, Republican officials say the other reasons they're optimistic are:
1) No Republican is being taken by surprise, unlike many Democrats in 1994. Shortly after Bush's reelection, White House and Republican National Committee officials began working to convince House members that the formidable reelection record for incumbents (since 1996, 97.5 percent) was not something they could take for granted. "What we attempted to do last year," said one of these officials, "was to go out of our way to say to people: 'You face a potential of a race. In order to win as an incumbent, you better have a plan,' " including an intensive focus on voter registration, a message plan that would unfold in phases, and a ground organization that was operating in a measurable, quantifiable way. When candidates were willing to do that, the party offered to work with them to offload some costs. The candidates were also encouraged to help raise money for the party, to complete the circle. One official involved in the process said Republican officials deliberately "scared" lawmakers, telling them: "You face a very tough road. You better be ready."
2) Absentee ballot requests and returns, closely tracked by the party, are meeting or exceeding past levels for Republicans in key states and districts. [LS's comment: I TOLD YOU SO] Republican officials say White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and party operatives are scrutinizing this data with the same intensity that they followed metrics like voter registration earlier in the cycle. For at least 68 races, they have been getting reports once a week on the number of voters registered, phone calls completed and doors knocked on. Now, they're getting a second report on the number of absentee ballots requested, absentee ballots returned and early votes cast. "We can look at that data flow and make an assumption about what's going on and plotting it out," a Republican official said.
3) When the national parties, national campaign committees, state "victory" committee accounts and competitive campaigns are added up, Republicans maintained a substantial financial advantage over Democrats at the last filing period. "We didn't look on it as one pot," said one official involved in the process. "We looked upon it as four pots, with synergy available through all four."
4) Republicans say the district-by-district playing field favors them in several structural ways not reflected in national polls. Here is their thinking, starting with statistics from the President's 2004 race against John F. Kerry: "There are 41 districts held by a Democrat that Bush carried, and 14 seats held by Republican that Kerry carried, so we're fighting on better turf. You see it in the open seats, where Bush carried 18 of the Republican open seats and Kerry carried two. So we're fighting on better turf."
5) The get-out-the-vote machine designed by Rove and now-Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman in 2001 was dubbed the "72-hour" program, but officials say that's quite a misnomer and that it's really a 17-week or even two-year program. "In Ohio, we are making more phone calls this year than we made two years ago," said an official involved in the process. "Now, that's not the case necessarily in Virginia, which was not a battleground state. You have to build that. In other places, we built that and built it early."
On the road Monday, Rove playfully answered the receptionist's phone at a hotel where the President was conducting an interview with Fox News Channel's Sean Hannity. "Historic Statesboro Inn," Rove said authoritatively, then went to track down the manager himself, returning several times to update the caller on the progress of his quest. On Air Force One on the way home, "the architect" made a rare appearance in the press cabin, handing out chocolate-covered pecans to the reporters. He waved the lid of the tin theatrically and said, "Sweets for my sweets!" In only a few days, it'll be clear whether he has outsmarted the pundits and Democrats, one last time.
I used the cowbell, before I didn't use it. (or words to that effect).
I think I saw it too. I believe it may have been in WSJ front page article last week about the Gubernatorial race in Michigan.
That's because AARP is an overwhelmingly liberal organization whose constituents are overwhelmingly conservative. The best way for AARP to advance its agenda is, paradoxically, to have its members stay home for the election. =]
Strange, ain't it?
I would like to see Time/Warner stocks or NYT stocks after the election.
Republicans holding both houses, no matter by how much, will be DEVASTATING to the MSM.
Pollsters will be really screwed (do customers get a refund?)
It also may mean the end of RealClearPolitics since they were bought out by time magazine.
One more time!
With feeling, people!
YES!
We should not underestimate the discouraging effect the implosion of Ned Lamont's campaign in Connecticut will have on folks like your letter-writing friend.
I was out in California about a month ago, and all anybody there was talking about was Ned Lamont, and how he was going to triumph in Connecticut, and bring a fresh(maker) voice to Washington, etc.. All of these people were from California, and none of them was talking about Angelides. Ned Lamont had completely captured their imagination.
Now that Neddie Boy is being crushed, and there will be no Senator from the State of Kos, these people are going to be angry and frustrated. Much of this anger is going to be directed at their own party. How many of them are going to bother to come out and vote for the party that torpedoed their hero, Ned Lamont?
"If KB gets 90% of conservatives (3% more than Bush) and 40% of "moderates" (1% less than (Bush), and 3% of liberals (11% LESS than Bush), that's 50%!
Does this include the fact that you are dealing with a different group of voters, or rather a much smaller subset of voters, this being an off-year?
Bob Beckel was on Fox this morning saying "is is a forgone conclusion the Democrats will take the house".
THAT is the taking point to make note.
The MSM is now redefining victory from TAKES ALL to takes just the house.
It seems we have some doublespeak newspeak revisionism going on.
Rush just read your excerpts word for word. :)
ROTFLMAO! I've never before used this particular overused word, but this time I have to say
bttt
Dude, it's not multiple choice!
Too bad Bob. All he is going to do is convince his party to stay home because obviously all the votes have been cast.
It's looking like it's going to be more than 1. :)
McGavick now 3.1 down in WA, Bouchard closing on Stabencow, and DeWine at only 1.4 back!!!
What will they do when the GOP GAINS THREE SEATS in the Senate???
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-flash06.html?project=elections06-ft&h=495&w=778&hasAd=1
fabulous isn't it!
Even though I am not happy with DeWine, this win will be great, because the dems were really counting on this one.
Not my analysis. It was courtesy of Freeper Dr. Free Market. However, if anything, the subsets would favor MORE conservatives and fewer moderates due to the fact that moderates don't turn out for mid-terms.
The AARP is nothing more than a liberal, nay socialist, lobbying group. I refuse to give those jerks a dime for their so-called benefits. They just want to steal from our children and grandchildren.
Maybe because I sent these to him earlier. I didn't get credit though :)
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.