Republicans fear Midterm losses-In the House

[dazzleman]

Midterm elections during a president's second term are usually the worst for the president's party, so there is good reason for concern.

Bush bucked the historical trend in the last midterm election, winning seats for the incumbent party in the White House for only the second time since 1934.

Will he buck it this time?  Probably not.  The question is how bad the losses will be.

Christopher Shays is very vulnerable despite redistricting that added more Republican areas to his district.  I read yesterday that he joined in co-sponsoring a measure to reintroduce the Equal Rights Amendment (gag).  It's very sad what my congressional district is coming to.  I don't know what has gone wrong with the people here.

[dazzleman]

What district are you in dazzleman?

I'm in the Connecticut fourth district, currently represented by Christopher Shays, the most endangered Republican incumbent.

The district has been in Republican hands since 1966 and I'd like it to stay that way.

Shays was always very comfortably re-elected until 2004, when he faced a strong challenge from Diane Farrell, the First Selectman (a New England term for highest elected official; basically a weak mayor) of Westport, one of the most liberal towns in the district.

She's the typical whiny liberal that is so greatly loved around here, though her executive position as First Selectman means she must balance a budget and try to keep taxes low, because people are here are socially liberal but fairly fiscally conservative.  This is one of the wealthiest congressional districts in the country.

Sad to say, I think it's only a matter of time before this district flips to the Democrats.  That seems to be the trend in mature affluent suburbs in the northeast and west coast areas.  I hate to see it happen, but I only have one vote, so there's not that much I can do about it.

[dazzleman]

Is it odd to see a party gain 25 house seats in midterm election?  What is the most a party has gained in one midterm?

It's not strange at all, though 25 seats is a pretty big number.

Off the top of my head, I can say the Reps. gained about 51 seats in the 1994 election.  In 1982, the Demcrats gained 26 seats, and that was considered about average at the time.

The gerrymandering issue has probably made it harder for there to be large numbers of gains or losses.  Racial gerrymandering in particular has moved the countries further apart, as there are fewer truly multi-racial districts where the seat is competitive, and the incumbent must craft a position that bridges the divide.  Now we get the fiery black rhetoric in black districts, and strong conservatives in the white districts.  And there is little chance that these types of districts will ever flip to the other party.

[dazzleman]

It seems that local Pennsylvania politics gets more exposure on this forum than any other state.

[dazzleman]

If in 2006 we have $4 gas, the dollar collapses, inflation returns, the economy goes in ressesion and we still have 150,000 troops in Iraq, picking up 25 seats would be possible for the Democrats.

Great point.  A lot has to do with the conditions that exist then.

Also, sometimes success is the worst thing in politics.  If Bush is perceived as so successful at dealing with national security threats that we can sink back into the languid attitude of the Clinton years, that helps the Democrats.