News Copy, New York

G.O.P. Reality Check: 58 Dem Seats In Play With Many Primaries Ahead

The New York Times reported that political analyst Stuart Rothenberg counts 58 Democratic House seats in play.  That's up from 47 in December.  That's a big difference from political analyst Michael Barone's assessment, who forecasted 130 of those districts in play. Republicans haven't lost any ground, with still only 14 seats in play. There is only enthusiasm.

“If you live in a district with no Republican candidate, run for office,” Representative Pete Sessions of Texas, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, wrote in a posting on RedState, a conservative blog.

The problem is that wealthy candidates will be courted by party leaders, for their dollars, but not necessarily for their credentials or ability to serve.  The other problem will be primaries.

The New York Times observed that "deeper intramural divisions are within the Republican Party, a sign of the intensity and unpredictability of the grass-roots conservative movement."

Which is liberal-speak for, conservatives and Tea Party candidates will cost Republicans elections.

"Across the country, Republican candidates are running as outsiders with the backing of conservative Tea Party groups, challenging Republicans identified with the party establishment. Several analysts said the victory in the Massachusetts Senate race of Scott Brown, a Republican who ran with Tea Party support, could encourage more challenges and drive incumbents further right."

This kind of staid conventional wisdom will prompt some GOP leaders to run Rhinos (Republican In Name Only) and other wiser chairs to seek Tea Party independents who speak the same language as the conservatives and libertarians seeking reform/overhaul.

Given Newt Gingrich's presence in New York's 23rd Congressional District race last year against, a three-way that was sabotaged by the former House Speaker's pronouncement for a liberal Republican and that liberal Republican then endorsing the Democrat, such repeat performances are imminent.

Thoug Conservative Douglas Hoffman narrowly lost that election, his re-match against Democrat Bill Owens is not yet getting a clear road from Republicans. The party in New York remains divided as Assemblyman Will barclay has announced that he will run against Owens, forcing another three-way primary.

 
Gingrich created this cult of independence fourteen years ago when he launched the Contract With America and Republicans took back the House of Representatives.

Now he and the Republican establishment want independent challengers to go home?

Michael Barone: Democrats May Have Only 103 Safe Seats

New York Republicans could win back more than half of the state's House seats if candidates run as well as Scott Brown, observed respected political analyst Michael Barone.  Nationwide, Democrats would be whittled down to 103 seats.

Merci'

The numerical analysis by Barone is a treat but it presumes a continued political failure by Democrats that is unrealistic.  Or maybe Democrats won't hunker down and re-group?  Maybe all the incumbents won't be as vain and unfocused as Coakley?  Perhaps the bigger issue is how many of these Congressional seats will be won by third party candidates ... Independents.

Republican vanity and hubris could be the next casualties of Tea Party candidates this November -- though watch the first collateral damage occur September 14th.  Incumbents and established party picks and insider favorites alike might be defeated on primary day. 

Barone's thoughtful analysis notes how Coakley wins in districts where Obama had 65% or better in 2008, running dead even where Obama had 64%.

Scott Brown takes everything else below 64%.

Applying that benchmark to the rest of the country, New York isn't a vast political wasteland for Republicans anymore (contrary to forecasted numbers).

It's nice to dream.

Numbers across the country show where Democrats normally would own House races -- but it comes back to Obama.

Though the blog, "A Certain Enthusiasm" (aptly put), cranks out numbers showing Coakley's demise in Obama-dominated Congressional Districts, someone should check precisely how many liberal Democrats stayed home -- versus non-affiliated voters who were finally roused to show up at the polling places.

Liberal Democrats will show up in November (Conservative Republicans will be there in September).

Republicans might get caught sleeping, both in primaries and the general election.

Democrats are historically better at re-grouping.  Republicans tend to pay the consultants a lot of money and overpower a race with paid media (and a lot of media there will be, with the recent Supreme Court decision affecting corporate donations and free speech).

The "gentry liberal" districts have their own turnout issues among liberal Republicans but Barone is correct that Democrats are trapped by their base.

"...House Democratic leadership has supported a solidly liberal agenda and has concentrated on whipping enough members from marginal districts to produce majorities on the floor—the large majority on the stimulus package in February or the narrow majority on cap-and-trade in June."

Republicans have the opposite problem.  They're a party whose dance with tea parties is provoking a search for something ... anything ... Bueller, Bueller ... anyone, anyone.  Hence, the candidates are lining up outside the door, both known and unknown.

Some of these districts will elect new faces.  The establishment party picks aren't bound to set the world on fire.  That's what both major parties still don't get.  Will the new faces have issues (as in true issues, not issues) and know how to campaign (and go through the exasperating process of fundraising and finding consultants who aren't thieves) -- or will they just expect a free ride to November and be beaten profusely by experienced political machines?

... Bueller, Bueller ...