The Democratic on-the-record and not-so-on-the-record responses (the Republicans were forced to put a lot of resources in the race, Bilbray underperformed Bush 2004, Busby's last-minute gaffe was costly and she wasn't such a great candidate, it's a very conservative district and Democrats will pick up our seats in Bluer quarters, look at how Busby performed with independents, etc*) are, trust us, not worth a warm bucket of anything.
Bottom line: Bilbray's victory shows that although Republican incumbents are running in a nasty national environment and although they are expected to lose some seats in November, the GOP is still favored to hold onto its majorities in both chambers because of several baked-in-the-cake advantages, including money, few retirements, safely-drawn seats, and a party apparatus that is adept at turning campaigns to local issues and turning out voters through micro targeting and hard work. ___________________________________
paragraph 1: Republicans were forced to put a lot of resources in the race...it's a very conservative seat...
paragraph 2: GOP advantages include money...safely drawn seats...
so 2 *reasons* in paragraph one are apparenrtly worth a warm bucket of something unless, of course, items in paragrah two are cold buckets of whatever...
can't really have it both ways...
given historical record, asserting that republicans will lose some seats while maintaining control is safe bet, even when people are dissatisfied with national conditions, congressional elections often produce only a small turnover in congressional membership...
1994 should not have been such a surprise, confluence of factors in late 1980s/early 1990s was indication that something was conceivably happening, but too few congressional watchers/ pundits/poli sci people were paying attention...
increasing democratic retirements, republicans winning open seat elections, about 25% of dem incumbent losses were shadowed by ethical questions/personal misconduct, hell, even majority-minority districts - largely a republican/bush the first idea - undermined democratic party strength in certain districts even as it resulted in increased numbers of minorities in congress...
concentrating black voters in homogeneous districts produced republican majorities in a lot of districts in the south, irony is that policies favored by african-americans became less likely to be enacted even though number of african-american representatives increased...
while only about 40 of 435 house races have been on 2006 radar-screen as competitive, unforseen things can happen, for example, republican rick keller's #8 district here in central florida has experienced some demographic changes since the district was drawn in 2002 by the republican majority in the state legislature as a solid republican district, he will probably win re-election but there is some concern that democratic candidate may actually be competitive... mh
Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.