[WOSG]

"But, typically, you're missing the point. It's entirely reasonable, based on a historical comparison to 92/94 to conclude that losing the House this year could lead to greater gains in '08. I for one don't think the Ds could help themselves, the moonbats have too great an influence."

Wrong. A Dem House will make a Dem PResident in 2008 more likely ... there is historical precedent.

[nopardons]

WOSG, you are 100% correct. Sadly, there are far too many on this site who only imagine that they are Conservatives and that they "understand" politics, when neither are true or factual. For some bizarre reason or other, political naifs really believe that they and they alone REALLY "get it", whilst the rest of us are some kind of brain dead morons and this, THIS, is the face of the easily proven fact that they have yet to ever be correct about anything they have ever posted to FR. LOL

ed, if anyone is a barking moonbat, it is the small but VERY vocal group here, who are the UNAPPEASEABLES/CUT OFF YOUR NOSE TO SPITE YOUR FACERS!

[edsheppa]

there is historical precedent.

Then please cite it. Also please note that Rs won the House in 94 but *didn't* win the WH in 96 which you must admit is a historcial precedent *against* your position.

You are clear what I'm saying here, right? That two years of gays-in-the-military, nationalized-healthcare moonbattery turned the Congress over to a conservative agenda. You don't really deny that do you?