Gephardt predicts Democratic majority in House

St Louis Today ^ | March 4, 2002 | David A. Lieb

[Darnright]

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) -- House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt filed for re-election Monday with a prediction that Democrats would win enough other races to regain a majority and make him speaker of the House.

Gephardt's candidacy filing in Jefferson City was sandwiched between those of two Republican colleagues -- Reps. Kenny Hulshof of northeast Missouri's 9th District and Todd Akin of the 2nd District in suburban St. Louis.

[Joee]

The mere thought of it brings out the chicken in me. That disaster would equate to the loss of the WTC.

[MHT]

Depends on where those 10-million vote. We don't see many here in Gephardt's district.

[Arleigh]

If the Repubs go ahead with their plans to legalize 10 million illegal Mexicans, I predict a lot of conservative voters are going to stay home come November.

HEY! Stop maligning our Dear Leader Dubya the Compassionate. The Republicrats are only going to legalize 3.5 million illegal Mexicans. Not 10 million. LOL!

I agree with your take. Republicrats have been alienating their base - straight white Christian males. They will stay home, unmotivated, while the Demopublicans will turn out in droves (even the dead ones!) to avenge the "disenfranchisement" of 2000. Expect the black churches to pull out all the stops getting their congregations to the voting booth.

The "economic turnaround" some of the posters talk about is merely a figment of their wishful imagination. IMHO stock market will be lower and mortgages rates higher in November.

BTW, Connie Morella is toast in Maryland's Montgomery County. She's a RINO, but she's still nominally a Republicrat.

[Jeff Sr.]

Gephardt is a Marxist hiding behind "liberalism". What a joke.

[savedbygrace]

``I think we're going to win the House back, I really do. I'm very optimistic about it,'' Gephardt said before filing for re-election in the St. Louis area's 3rd District.

And I would never, never lie to you. Cross my heart and hope to die. I really, really, really, really, really am telling you the truth about this. I promise very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, much.

[VRWC_minion]

Republicrats have been alienating their base - straight white Christian males

Speaking as a straight white Christian male, the republicans have not alienated me, or even slightly anoyed me (excepting Trent Lott of curse).

[orfisher]

>>With a strong economy, and continued high poll numbers by George Bush, Democrats will have a hard time convincing the American public to change horses in mid-stream.<< Ain't that easy. Bush has the high ratings, not congress. A rising stock market is not the indicator, it's jobs....and it's the jobless that will vote Democrap.

[rwfromkansas]

I doubt voter fraud will have that much of an effect this year. If the electorate was as divided as 2000, you may be right.

[Common Tator]

There is no doubt that many elections have been won by an attractive candidate and issues that motivate. But from my experince, I think a factor that can not be discounted is turn out. Parties used to preach that the goal should be to put the other side to sleep while motivating your own troops.

I think what made 2,000 close and the polls wrong was the turn out. The Democrats did the best job in decades of getting the vote out. A lot of that had to do with new labor leaders who wanted to establish that they had enough clout to elect a president. They failed. I don't think they want to fail twice. They don't have much clout with the president, and they could have a lot less at least until at least 2009.

This year I think the unions will be far less motivated and far less willing to spend money and effort than they were 2 years ago. For that reason I think the turnout for Democrats in machine controlled areas of our nation will be far less than it was in 2000.

Daschles attacks on Bush are obviously counter productive. Even the Demorats understand they are counter productive. They are not engergizing Daschles troops, but they are getting to his opponents. Daschle appears to be making Republicans mad, and putting Democrats to sleep. Daschle and Gebhart apear to have it backwards. This is going to be a good year for Republicans.

Daschle appears to be a confused little man crying for a rule book. It is new ball game, and he is confused because he does not know the rules.

[Common Tator]

and it's the jobless th

You sound like Robert A. Taft and the people who thought the joblessness in the depression would desptroy Roosevelt.

After 2 years of Roosevelt the economy was terrible and unemployement was sky high and the Democrats did just fine in Congresss. After 4 years of Roosevelt the economy was terrible and unemployement was sky high and the Democrats did just fine in congress. After 6 years of Roosevelt the economy was terrible and unemployement was sky high and the Democrats did just fine in Congress. After 8 years of Roosevelt the economy was terrible and unemployement was sky high and the Democrats did just fine in Congress. After 10 years of Roosevelt the economy was terrible and unemployement was sky high and the Democrats did just fine in Congress.

After 12 years of Roosevelt the economy was fantastic and unemployement was near zerot and the Democrats did just fine in Congress.

During that entire 12 years period the party out of power never stopped trashing Roosevelt. They attacked every proposal he made. They did not try to fix the problems, they tried to blame Roosevelt for the problems. The media hated Roosevelt and presented every attack on FDR in foot high headlines. It never worked.

Todays Democrats are doing to Bush what the Republicans did to Roosevelt. Their angry oposition will give Dubya everything he wants.

For over 200 years Americans have voted for people who try to fix things and defeated those that try to stop them. Results are not nearly as important as being seen as the one who is making an effort to fix problems. This year that is Dubya!

[stumpy]

What has he been smoking??????????

[SouthCarolinaKit]

Excuse me. . . this is news? He predicts this every two years. Unfortunately, I agree that unless we get rid of the fraud (Dems think that's their right) it could happen. Are there NO honest Dems?

[WVNan]

Saying, "I really do" makes him look like the guy who says, "trust me."

[eno_]

I think that is what the Republicans are thinking - that the 9/11 effect is stronger than the vote fraud effect. But remember: last time they bet that Clinton-fatigue was stronger than vote fraud and that Gore's obvious lameness would sink him. And the POLL NUMBERS said they were right.

If they don't factor in 2.5% for fraud, they are riding for a fall.

[eno_]

That's a plausible way to look at it. But it ignores the elephant in the room: vote fraud. I would agree there are other large effects on the coming election. But vote fraud is unique in that pollsters cannot - they explicitly design their polls not to - measure it. Which results in the best polls having results that do not predict election outcomes. So, for example, if labor turnout was what brought Al Gore to within a whisker of winning, why did only Zogby call the result accurately? Was every other pollster blind? And what would they be most likley to miss? A swing in the labor vote, or massive fraud?

[b4its2late]

Excuse me. . . this is news?

LOL! and agreed..

[Common Tator]

But it ignores the elephant in the room: vote fraud.

When I mentioned that UNION's would be far less active in 2002 and 2004, I figured that anyone could see that meant buying votes and stuffing ballot boxes would be way down. What do you think unions do in elections, pass out literature? The Democratic party does not buy votes or commit voter fraud directly... They could get caught. That is what Preachers and Unions are for.

It matters not if the method is to stuff ballot boxes, screw the voting machines, pay people to vote or all three. The results are the same and it all costs lots of money.

I suspect that you are totally surprised that people want big bucks to commit crimes. The fact is they do.

The money to do that comes from unions. Union Voter Education funds are used to teach and practice stealing votes. They do not use party money because party money it is far to easy to trace. Thirty million dollars spent on petty cash items is hard to explain.Plus if the fraud is done by a third parties, and the truth outs, the "candidates" and party are always unaware and totally shocked.

One of the most effective ways in recent years is to use Black preachers as the conduit for the money. The money is given to the church. The preacher takes the money and uses it to buy poll workers, and voters.... keeping his cut of course.

It costs a ton, and this year the unions are not going to do nearly as much of it.

[eno_]

Ah, OK, I see. Public sector unions, especially, would find vote fraud by means of illegal aliens exactly their cuppa. I was thinking steel workers and the like.