One thing to look for in a 2008 President candidate: Coat-tails in Congressional races

[Ignacio Upton]

This hasn't been talked about yet as far as I know, but coat-tails from a Presidential candidate CAN make the difference in Congressional races during Presidential years. For example, we could have beaten Conrad Burns in 2000 (Schweitzer ran against him) but he narrowly won re-election in part because of Bush's coat-tails in Montana. Likewise, in 2004 we could have picked up Senate seats in Alaska (against Lisa Murkowsi) Kentucky (against Jim Bunning) and Florida (against Mel Martinez) but we narrowly lost each race, likely in part due to Bush's support in those states.

At the same time, I can remember instances in 2000 and 2004 where Democratic Congressional candidates had to run away from Gore and Kerry in terms of associating themselves with candidates who were almost sure to lose in certain states. We cannot allow for this to happen again in 2008 if we want to keep control of Congress. Remember, in the elections after wave elections, the party that gained seats can often lose a lot of them. Case in point, a lot of the Republican Class of 1994 was defeated just two years later in 1996, when the Republicans ran a shitty candidate in Bob Dole, versus our strong Bill Clinton.

So, which candidates could help us the most in the area of coat-tails to keep Congress? I would say that Wes Clark John Edwards, and Evan Bayh fit this description the best. While Bayh is a little too conservative on me for some issues (being a member of the DLC) I won't be upset if he is the nominee, because he will play well in Congressional districts and Senate seats that we need to pick up or retain (especially in the three Indiana Congressional districts we picked up this year.)

[skipos]

1. Clark & Schweitzer. nt

[Ignacio Upton]

2. Schweitzer will be up for re-election

He will have not even have served one term as Governor if he chooses to run.

[napi21]

3. I would give almost anything to get Schweitzer to Washington!

However, on EVERY interview I've seen, he says he has the best job in the world! "Why would I ever want to leave Montana?"

I'm nowhere close to Mt., but I really like that guy!

[FrenchieCat]

4. Ya know, I was thinking exactly that!

It is clear to me from the results of these elections vs. the 2004 ones, that it was easier to win this time around because there was no presidential ticket for voters to look at....and so instead they had to look at Bush's record solely. In 2004, the Dem candidate for Prez may have obscured just how bad Bush was....because voters were looking at both and having to decide which would be best as opposed to seeing how bad of shape we were in.

[wisteria]

5. Our problem wasn't the candidates, it was the fact that we ignored the

South. Just because a candidate comes from a Southern state does not mean that he will automatically have more appeal. Take Edwards for example, it was expected that he would win at least his home state for Dem's and he did not. Look at Gore, he didn't take his home state of Tenn either. It is wrong to assume that all we have to do is through in a Southern candidate and that will cinch it for us.
We need to actually do the hard work it will take to win the South. A start would be to campaign in the South and make them feel they would have a voice and representation in our party.

Don't blame Senator Kerry for what amounts to a typical 'inside Washington" strategy. They ignored the South and hoped all they needed to do was give them Edwards and they would jump on board. Nope, wrong, what was needed was honest dialog and recognition. Kerry could have gained additional votes in the South,if his managers and Washington, would of allowed him to campaign more there.
Dean's strategy is good because it reintroduces us to the South. Bahy and Edwards aren't going to do any better than Kerry or Gore, because the South has grown to distrust all Democrats. No matter if they live in the South or not.

[CK_John]

6. All of our members in the House and Senate need to learn how

to keep in touch with their home districts, keep their web sites current, and get back to the district as often as possible. Also they must build a home base of their own regardless of the top of the ticket.

Most important is NOT to attach themselves to any candidate until after the convention and learn to NOT give info that can be used against a candidate in the general election. Also every question does not have an answer or need to be answered. If you don't know, say so and tell them you will find out and get back to them!

[election_2004]

7. This is a PERFECT reason why Hillary should NOT be the nominee

Wanna see Dems lose a wave of U.S. House seats in red states (and what few Democratic-held red U.S. Senate seats remain) in 2008?

Then nominate Senator Clinton to be the party's new standard-bearer.

The GOP will sincerely thank you when it reclaims Congress.