Democrat wins another GOP-friendly seat

[RunInRed 16,449]

If the GOP can't win in Mississippi then where do they plan on winning? Even funnier, the RNC ran ads trying to attack the Democrat by linking him to Obama/Wright.

Guess the good folks in the state of MS saw through that. If these voters don't care about Wright, which ones will? Republicans better find a better game plan for the fall or they will continue to lose seats in congress.

Now remember that this is a deeply conservative district, one that Bush won with 63% of the vote in 2004. And yet, Democrat Travis Childers won the district by eight points...

May 13, 2008

CNN: Democrat will win GOP-friendly Mississippi seat

Posted: 10:15 PM ET

Democrat Travis Childers, left, beat Republican Greg Davis in a special election Tuesday in Mississippi.

(CNN) — Democrat Travis Childers has defeated Republican Greg Davis in the special election for an open congressional seat in northern Mississippi, CNN projected Tuesday night, based on early returns.

Republicans have held the seat since 1994.

UPDATE: National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Cole said in a statement he is "disappointed" with the result.

"Republicans must undertake bold efforts to define a forward looking agenda that offers the kind of positive change voters are looking for," Cole also said. "This is something we can do in cooperation with our Presidential nominee, but time is short."

(Full Cole statement after the jump)

“We are disappointed in tonight’s election results. Though the NRCC, RNC and Mississippi Republicans made a major effort to retain this seat, we came up short.

“Tonight’s election highlights two significant challenges Republicans must overcome this November. First, Republicans must be prepared to campaign against Democrat challengers who are running as conservatives, even as they try to join a liberal Democrat majority. Though the Democrats’ task will be more difficult in a November election, the fact is they have pulled off two special election victories with this strategy, and it should be a concern to all Republicans.

“Second, the political environment is such that voters remain pessimistic about the direction of the country and the Republican Party in general. Therefore, Republicans must undertake bold efforts to define a forward looking agenda that offers the kind of positive change voters are looking for. This is something we can do in cooperation with our Presidential nominee, but time is short.

“I encourage all Republican candidates, whether incumbents or challengers, to take stock of their campaigns and position themselves for challenging campaigns this fall by building the financial resources and grassroots networks that offer them the opportunity and ability to communicate, energize and turn out voters this election.”

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/...seat/#more-7115

[autigeremt 6,657]

America, that's where. A congressional seat is not the U.S.A. It's notable, don't get me wrong, but it's nothing to worry about.

[RunInRed 16,449]

America, that's where. A congressional seat is not the U.S.A. It's notable, don't get me wrong, but it's nothing to worry about.

This is the 3rd special election and congressional seat the GOP has lost - and they all were in very conservative districts that the Republicans had held for many years. Notable, to say the least.

[Tiger Al 0]

America, that's where. A congressional seat is not the U.S.A. It's notable, don't get me wrong, but it's nothing to worry about.

ALL IS WELL!!!

[Auburn85 432]

How many more do they need to pass universal healthcare? or can they do it before the election? The fierce urgency of now, not January of 09. That's over 8 months away. Alot of people can't afford to wait that long.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just to keep things in a little bit of perspective, Childers is hardly the typical national Democrat candidate. He's pro-life and against gun control. As this Democrat blogger says:

Who needs Republicans when you have Democrats like Travis Childers? Some Democrats will argue that he is better than Davis on many issues-- which is true. He is. Some of our progressive friends are promoting him as "an economic populist who supports S-CHIP, opposes CAFTA and wants us to withdraw our troops from Iraq in 12 to 18 months." I like all that.

But what I don't like can be found right here. Scroll down 'til you find Dan Boren (D-OK), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), John Barrow (D-GA), Nick Lampson (D-TX) and Jim Marshall (D-GA). This 5 reactionaries are each "better" than the Republicans they ran against. But each, since getting into Congress, has voted more frequently with the right-wing Republicans on substantive issues than they have with Democrats. Even worse, they have pulled the Democratic majority right-ward. Travis Childers will fit in somewhere between Joe Donnelly and Jim Marshall.

downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2008/05/you-rootin-for-anyone-in-mississippi.html

Point being, the only Democrats that will win in areas they aren't "supposed to" are ones that are mostly conservative. Frankly, I'm all for the Blue Dog Democrats infiltrating the party. Hopefully one day soon it will result in some common sense being reinstilled to the loony left fringe that's got a hammer lock on the national scene. And the other benefit is that it will hopefully get the attention of Republicans that give lip service to the social conservatives while being lap dogs to corporate interests and the fiscal conservative/social liberals.

[WinCrimson 61]

Democrats who win GOP districts in Louisiana and Mississippi will be centrists. Yet, that's all part of the plan.

Putting the Travis Childers and Heath Shulers of the nation in Congress only gives more seats and power to Nancy Pelosi and the more liberal party as a whole. The refusal to accept this strategy has killed Republicans in the vote rich Northeast and has helped the Dems regain Congress.

These elections have also been barometers for November. When the idea of a radical Muslim takeover by a black Yankee isn't selling in Mississippi, of all places, you can kiss it goodbye in the general election. If ever I was assured that Obama was going to be our next President, it was now.

When he gives that speech at the convention, it's going to be lights out, baby.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Democrats who win GOP districts in Louisiana and Mississippi will be centrists. Yet, that's all part of the plan.

Putting the Travis Childers and Heath Shulers of the nation in Congress only gives more seats and power to Nancy Pelosi and the more liberal party as a whole. The refusal to accept this strategy has killed Republicans in the vote rich Northeast and has helped the Dems regain Congress.

Temporarily, that's true. But as more and more of them get elected, they'll start having a bigger and bigger voice and the liberal wing will find themselves in the position of having to compromise more and more to keep the Blue Dogs happy, which in turn will reign in the more wacko elements of the party and possibly even get them to rethink things like their tireless support for the sacrament of abortion.

I welcome it. I'd like conservative Christians to get out of being married to one party that mostly nibbles around the edges of issues that are important to them but does little of substantive value...pretty much the exact same position African American voters find themselves in their loyalty to Democrats.

[RunInRed 16,449]

Point being, the only Democrats that will win in areas they aren't "supposed to" are ones that are mostly conservative. Frankly, I'm all for the Blue Dog Democrats infiltrating the party. Hopefully one day soon it will result in some common sense being reinstilled to the loony left fringe that's got a hammer lock on the national scene.

Yes, this strategy was noted in the original post.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Point being, the only Democrats that will win in areas they aren't "supposed to" are ones that are mostly conservative. Frankly, I'm all for the Blue Dog Democrats infiltrating the party. Hopefully one day soon it will result in some common sense being reinstilled to the loony left fringe that's got a hammer lock on the national scene.

Yes, this strategy was noted in the original post.

I think the liberal wing thinks it's a strategy that will secure power for them, but as time goes on it's either going to change the party significantly (as the Blue Dogs are not going to just be ornaments to give the Dems control) or it will create a "bubble" of sorts that benefits the Democratic party for a season, then bursts if the Blue Dogs aren't given a real voice and a seat at the table and they defect to the GOP like several Democrat Southern congressmen and senators did in the 80s and 90s, creating a momentous shift in power all of the sudden.

[RunInRed 16,449]

Point being, the only Democrats that will win in areas they aren't "supposed to" are ones that are mostly conservative. Frankly, I'm all for the Blue Dog Democrats infiltrating the party. Hopefully one day soon it will result in some common sense being reinstilled to the loony left fringe that's got a hammer lock on the national scene.

Yes, this strategy was noted in the original post.

I think the liberal wing thinks it's a strategy that will secure power for them, but as time goes on it's either going to change the party significantly (as the Blue Dogs are not going to just be ornaments to give the Dems control) or it will create a "bubble" of sorts that benefits the Democratic party for a season, then bursts if the Blue Dogs aren't given a real voice and a seat at the table and they defect to the GOP like several Democrat Southern congressmen and senators did in the 80s and 90s, creating a momentous shift in power all of the sudden.

I think the party overall is much more moderate than most give it credit for. Those on the far left usually grab the headlines but if you look at the body in it's entirety, it is not as skewed as those on Fox News want you to believe.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Point being, the only Democrats that will win in areas they aren't "supposed to" are ones that are mostly conservative. Frankly, I'm all for the Blue Dog Democrats infiltrating the party. Hopefully one day soon it will result in some common sense being reinstilled to the loony left fringe that's got a hammer lock on the national scene.

Yes, this strategy was noted in the original post.

I think the liberal wing thinks it's a strategy that will secure power for them, but as time goes on it's either going to change the party significantly (as the Blue Dogs are not going to just be ornaments to give the Dems control) or it will create a "bubble" of sorts that benefits the Democratic party for a season, then bursts if the Blue Dogs aren't given a real voice and a seat at the table and they defect to the GOP like several Democrat Southern congressmen and senators did in the 80s and 90s, creating a momentous shift in power all of the sudden.

I think the party overall is much more moderate than most give it credit for. Those on the far left usually grab the headlines but if you look at the body in it's entirety, it is not as skewed as those on Fox News want you to believe.

I watch about 5 minutes worth of Fox News a month. That's not where I get my ideas about the party. The reason the far left gets the headlines is because so many of the far left get the choice power slots and steer the agenda.

[Tigermike 3,043]

Point being, the only Democrats that will win in areas they aren't "supposed to" are ones that are mostly conservative. Frankly, I'm all for the Blue Dog Democrats infiltrating the party. Hopefully one day soon it will result in some common sense being reinstilled to the loony left fringe that's got a hammer lock on the national scene.

Yes, this strategy was noted in the original post.

I think the liberal wing thinks it's a strategy that will secure power for them, but as time goes on it's either going to change the party significantly (as the Blue Dogs are not going to just be ornaments to give the Dems control) or it will create a "bubble" of sorts that benefits the Democratic party for a season, then bursts if the Blue Dogs aren't given a real voice and a seat at the table and they defect to the GOP like several Democrat Southern congressmen and senators did in the 80s and 90s, creating a momentous shift in power all of the sudden.

I think the party overall is much more moderate than most give it credit for. Those on the far left usually grab the headlines but if you look at the body in it's entirety, it is not as skewed as those on Fox News want you to believe.

Just leave Fox news out of your statement and provide facts to back up your statement. As for the Blue Dogs, they have for the most part been fairly irrelevant in the drift of the congress & senate toward the left. (link coming)

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just leave Fox news out of your statement and provide facts to back up your statement. As for the Blue Dogs, they have for the most part been fairly irrelevant in the drift of the congress & senate toward the left. (link coming)

Well, they are too small right now to be any serious impediment. But if the trend continues (and frankly I hope it does), they will have enough of a voice to affect the agenda.

[Tigermike 3,043]

Just leave Fox news out of your statement and provide facts to back up your statement. As for the Blue Dogs, they have for the most part been fairly irrelevant in the drift of the congress & senate toward the left. (link coming)

Well, they are too small right now to be any serious impediment. But if the trend continues (and frankly I hope it does), they will have enough of a voice to affect the agenda.

Democratic Majority Turns House Dramatically More Liberal: Senate Maintains Left Status Quo

By Dr. Donald J. Devine

ACU Vice Chairman

It is good to be in control; and Democrats have taken remarkable advantage of the opportunity they won in the 2006 election. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been especially effective in turning the House left, dramatically increasing Democratic cohesion and liberal voting. Majority Leader Harry Reid, being constrained by the more open rules of the upper body, has nonetheless also been effective in continuing the leftward movement in Senate voting recorded last year.

The House roll call vote figures are extraordinary. In 2007, 212 Members earned an ACU conservatism score of 20 or less—our definition of a liberal—compared to a mere 144 liberal Congressmen just last year and 155 in 2005. Those earning a perfect liberal score of zero increased from six Members in 2006 to a record 138 this year. While every Congressman who scored liberal last year was a Democrat, they were even joined for the first time recently by two Republicans, Mike Castle (DE) and Chris Shays (CT). Upon learning that Republicans had lost the majority, Castle said moderates felt “liberated” and their voting proves it. Scores of moderate Republicans moved substantially to the left in their voting, freed from the need to sustain GOP leadership priorities.

Republicans went from 172 members last year with an ACU rating of 80% or higher – our definition of a conservative—down to 152 in 2007. Yet, since the Democratic leadership did not allow many real conservative amendments, the average score of this smaller group actually went up, with 62 Republicans earning a perfect conservatism rating of 100%. The highest scoring Democrat was Gene Taylor (MS), at 72% conservative. In 2005, 186 members had been rated as conservative.

In sum, 48.7% of House Members voted liberal and 34.9% voted conservative, compared to 39.5% conservative and 33.1% liberal the year earlier, a remarkable shift leftward.

Voting patterns in the Senate were more stable but did move enough to make a difference. In 2007, 48 Senators scored a liberal rating of 20% or less – all Democrats (except Joe Lieberman (CT), a nominal independent), compared to 40 last year, a considerable shift for the narrowly divided upper house. A substantial 21 Democratic Senators earned a perfect liberal zero rating, including Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama scored a 7% conservative rating, compared to a marginal 80% for John McCain—but all of the presidential candidates missed many controversial votes. Only 33 Senators scored 80% conservative or better, all Republicans, essentially the same as the 34 last year but down sharply from the 46 who earned the designation conservative in 2005.

Five GOP Senators received a perfect 100% conservative rating in 2007, the same number as 2006, while there were 12 in 2005, 8 in 2004, and none in 2003. Perfect conservative scores were earned by Tom Coburn (OK), Jim DeMint (SC), James Inhofe (OK), John Kyl (AZ) and newcomer John Barrasso (WY). The highest scoring Democrats were Mary Landrieu (LA) at 40% and Ben Nelson (NE) at 32%. Sixteen Republicans scored as moderates, with Olympia Snowe (ME) the lowest at a meager 28% conservative rating.

The year 2007 has been historic for it is relatively rare that one ideology dominates both houses of Congress. In 2007, liberals were short of an absolute majority in the House by a mere six seats and by only two in the Senate. With 2008 looking like a poor electoral year for Republicans in Congress, things will probably not be getting much better for conservatives in the near future.

Dr. Devine is a vice chairman of the American Conservative Union.

link

[WinCrimson 61]

Democrats who win GOP districts in Louisiana and Mississippi will be centrists. Yet, that's all part of the plan.

Putting the Travis Childers and Heath Shulers of the nation in Congress only gives more seats and power to Nancy Pelosi and the more liberal party as a whole. The refusal to accept this strategy has killed Republicans in the vote rich Northeast and has helped the Dems regain Congress.

Temporarily, that's true. But as more and more of them get elected, they'll start having a bigger and bigger voice and the liberal wing will find themselves in the position of having to compromise more and more to keep the Blue Dogs happy, which in turn will reign in the more wacko elements of the party and possibly even get them to rethink things like their tireless support for the sacrament of abortion.

I welcome it. I'd like conservative Christians to get out of being married to one party that mostly nibbles around the edges of issues that are important to them but does little of substantive value...pretty much the exact same position African American voters find themselves in their loyalty to Democrats.

And I think we both agree that this is not necessarily a bad thing. I see nothing wrong with the major political parties having a cleansing every decade or so. Democrats had theirs in 1994 and Republicans will have their second in a row come November.

In the past, Democrats have tossed their strategy out there and got defeated. The party never changed neither did it's "liberal" candidates (The moderate Clinton... Gore more liberal than he... Kerry more so... Obama even more, etc). The only thing that has changed is the message and strategy. I'm expecting Republicans to shift hard right to the dismay of many moderates-GOPers after their 2008 struggles. The conservative Christian bloc will eventually rule the party but have no representation in government.

[RunInRed 16,449]

Third House loss shakes GOP, raises fears for fall

By DAVID ESPO – 16 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Stunned House Republicans vowed campaign changes Wednesday and debated the wisdom of attacking Democratic presidential front-runner Barack Obama in congressional races after their third straight election defeat in once-friendly territory.

"The political atmosphere ... is the worst since Watergate and far more toxic than the fall of 2006 when we lost 30 seats," Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia wrote the leadership in a bluntly worded memo.

"Clearly, I think we've got to do a better job" going into the November elections, said the Republican leader, Rep. John Boehner, one day after Democrat Travis Childers won a Mississippi congressional victory. That seat had been in Republican hands since the 1994 landslide that swept the GOP into power.

Several lawmakers and aides said a change was possible but far from certain at the National Republican Congressional Committee, where Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole is chairman. Party leaders also said they were on the verge of distributing a campaign season manifesto to their rank and file setting out conservative positions on taxes and other issues.

Davis, a former chairman of the campaign committee who is retiring at the end of this year, noted that polls show Americans overwhelmingly believe the country is headed down the wrong track, President Bush is unpopular, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee enjoyed a cash advantage of $44 million to $7 million as of March 31.

Childers' victory came one week after Rep. Don Cazayoux won a House seat in the Baton Rouge, La., area that had been in Republican hands for three decades. Over the winter, Rep. Bill Foster won an election in Illinois to succeed former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who had been in Congress more than 20 years.

All three races were necessitated by resignations by incumbent Republicans.

Childers and Cazayoux both ran as conservatives, but Republicans and their allies sought to link them to Obama in television commercials. In both cases, some Republicans said the tactic appeared to backfire, prompting blacks to turn out in unexpectedly large numbers and vote for the Democrats.

One-third of the population in the Louisiana district and one-quarter of the population in the Mississippi district is black.

"We're not going to be able to scare people into voting Republicans by being against Barack Obama. You have to have a relevant agenda and a compelling reason to vote Republican," said Rep. Chip Pickering, R-Miss.

Yet other Republicans said Obama's record, which they describe as liberal, is fair game for the fall campaign. "It's very legitimate, parts of his vision and his agenda that the American people need to be aware of," said Rep. Adam Putnam of Florida, a member of the party leadership.

In Louisiana, Freedom's Watch, an independent group that promotes Republicans, had run an ad that said Cazayoux is "with Barack Obama for a big government scheme" for health insurance. "Their plan raises income taxes and raises taxes on small business," it said.

The NRCC broadcast an advertisement that said Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi represent "a radical agenda, very different from Louisiana's values."

In Louisiana, Cazayoux countered with recorded telephone calls by Michelle Obama that were placed into thousands of homes in black portions of the district in the final stages of the campaign.

In Mississippi, Freedom's Watch and the GOP challenger, Greg Davis, both used Obama in their television commercials.

Davis' ad was by far the more pointed.

"Obama says, 'Childers will put progress before politics,'" it said. "But, when Obama's pastor cursed America, blaming us for 9/11, Childers said nothing. When Obama ridiculed rural folks for clinging to guns and religion Childers said nothing.

"Travis Childers, he took Obama's endorsement over our conservative values."

Cole, like other Republicans mulling the results, said the voters had sent Republicans a message that said, "We want to know what you believe in, what you want to fight for."

In all three races, Republicans said the losses could be traced largely to local factors. They said the party was divided in Illinois, for example, a weak candidate was on the ballot in Louisiana and regional differences hampered Davis in Mississippi.

At the same time, the cumulative effect of the loss of three seats in special elections was a significant blow to a party that is still adjusting to its loss of power in the 2006 midterm elections.

"They are canaries in the coal mine, warning of far greater losses in the fall, if steps are not taken to remedy the current climate," Davis wrote in his memo.

Childers' victory leaves Republicans with only 199 seats, compared with 236 for the Democrats. Adding to the short-term GOP difficulties, Rep. Vito Fossella, R-N.Y., married with kids, is privately weighing his future after acknowledging recently that he fathered a child out of wedlock.

Numerous Republicans have said they hope Fossella will resign or at least retire. But given the party's financial problems, several senior GOP aides want him to remain in Congress until July 1. That would eliminate the need for yet another special election, this time in the country's most expensive media market.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iRUh6Zl...bfi3kQD90LNDR81

[WinCrimson 61]

Could this finally be the day we don't have to hear them beat their chest and stroke their egos over their pseudo "conservative" values?