Washing Monthly: May not be the landslide it could be

[Bucky]

Two posts on the Washinton Monthly's "Showdown 06" blog are splashing a little cold water on the victory talk I'm seeing around DU. Sobering thoughts for us pessimists to grouse about until Tuesday night. While no one is saying "landslide", much less "realignment", the fact is that we're psyching ourselves up for a big win and two poster at Showdown '06 are offering a reality check.

WM editor in chief Paul Glastris spoke with an anonymous pollster who's says there's

"real doubts that a big Democratic 'wave' is about to hit. He’s '95 percent sure,' he says, that Democrats will take the House, probably by a five to ten seat margin. But he just 'doesn’t see a pattern' to those expected pickups that would suggest the kind of broad change in the public’s mood that would lead to the 30-to-50 seat pickup that some are talking about... A real anti-incumbent, anti-GOP wave, he says, would sweep out some otherwise strong officeholders and sweep in some weaker challengers. But he doesn’t see signs of that..."

Writer Nick Penniman is saying we as a party haven't been radical enough, given the anticorruption mood the country seems to be in.

"Ever since Jack Abramoff became a household name, there’s been an ongoing debate in Washington about whether or not the Democrats could make corruption a useful electoral issue...
(C)lubbing the GOP with corruption is incredibly effective. Jeffery Birnbaum and Jonathan Weisman at the Washington Post assert that the scandals are cutting hard against the Republicans in 15 races. How many more could be in play? Why haven’t the Democrats been on more of a rampage?...
So, somewhere in the fog of DC consensus building, the decision was made to “message” against corruption but not run hard against as true reformers. The way Gingrich did against the Democrats in 1994. Or, more appropriately, the way progressives did 100 years ago, during the last Gilded Age. "

Both are good reads, but the Penniman is something to bookmark and think about when time comes to start nagging our new crop of committee chairpersons for real reform in the spring.

[grasswire]

1. outlier (eom)

[rodeodance]

2. i am going to ADOPT several people next Tues--a few who gen. do not

bother to vote---just lazy. i know they will vote dem. once there.

[berni_mccoy]

3. Eh. Two Opinions.

[bullimiami]

4. i am so sick of these head in the sand pundits who analyze trends

and make predictions but never mention the fraud.

there can be no honest analysis of elections for at least the last 6 years without taking the anomalies into account. othewise, like these 2 articles, its all just pointless bullshit.

[Nite Owl]

5. Anonymous pollster?

Why would a pollster be anonymous? Sounds more like a gop operative trying to set things up for a questionable win in some areas and try to turn out their disillusioned base.

[Straight Shooter]

6. a/k/a Karl Rove and his amazing mathematical machine. n/t

[deacon]

10. Bingo n/t

[TomClash]

7. I don't buy it

Unless they totally DIEbold us, we pick up 25+ in the House and at least 4 in the Senate. There are almost House 50 seats in play.

[elocs]

8. Elections are turning into a real heads we win, tails you lose for Dems.

If there is a big win on Tuesday for the Democrats we will be dancing in the streets. If not, then the claim will be voter fraud, we was robbed, and the stupid sheeple don't know who to vote for.
I am looking forward to the day when we lose an election and can simply say that the voters preferred the other candidate(s). (Actually, I am not looking forward to losing any elections, but that is not realistic.)

[Justice]

9. this sounds like republicans trying to minimize the fact of losing

All we have said is we are going to take the house, period. That is a HUGE victory. This sounds like republicans trying to say that unless we have a landslide, we Democrats lose. Garbage.

Remember Bush in 2004 squeaking by -- saying, I have a mandate? Remember Dems, a win is a win is a mandate. Whether by 1 or by 100.

[AnnInLa]

11. We REALLY should keep expectations low

because the more the bobble-heads declare a Dem wave, a tidal wave even, then the more they can claim we did not do "as well as expected" when we take the House by maybe fewer than a wave. Then the meme will be that Dems really lost, because they did not do as well as expected. It is almost a conspiracy by that damn liberal media. Say we take the House with a 5 seat margin....then, by the standards they have set, we have done worse than expected. Those Dems have lost yet again....why can't they get anything right?

[Doctor_J]

12. We're still battling the media on this issue

if hate radio were Dem instead of GOP, we'd be looking at 50-60 seats pickup easily. Of course, if that were the case, Smirk would have been impeached long ago...