I understand your point, but the fact is Dems won in many “GOP” areas. Why do you think this happened. Will these voters return to the party in 2010? Who knows.
Each district has individual reasons for why they went a certain way. We don’t have a system where we vote “party” as opposed to individual candidates. After all, if we had had that in 1984, we’d have had well over 300 House Republicans (and in 1972, close to 400). There are far more Dems sitting in GOP districts than vice versa. We’re at more of a disadvantage since there are many districts where it’s nearly impossible for a Republican to win (such as Civil Rights districts), except in extraordinary circumstances (such as LA-2).
We can also have great candidates, but if we don’t have money to dislodge them, that is also a big problem. It’s hard to beat people who can massively outspend you. But the GOP, too, has to get its act together for 2010. Our leadership is piss poor and we’re running in a hundred different directions. We’ve got to get unified and on-message.
Don’t be overly glum Bronx. What we had in 2006 in 2008 was anti-Bush toxicity not some great sea change. Demoralized conservatives plus heightened Obama turnout spelled disaster.
Walberg’s seat absolutely should not be rat held and will be a top target to reclaim. We’ve been a pathetic minority in congress before with rats occupying GOP seats. These current wounds are sadly largely self-inflicted but time can change things again.