End of conventional wisdom?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The 2004 popular vote numbers in the House are nearly identical to the 2002 popular vote numbers in the House.  Notice the similarity to the popular vote for President in 2004.

2004 numbers: Reps. 51-Dems. 47
2002 numbers: Reps. 51-Dems. 46

This lies in contrast to the 1996, 1998, 2000 House popular vote numbers which were tied at 49-49 for each election.

There has been a shift since 2000, it seems obvious now.

Whether this has to do with 9/11 or the strength of Bush's politics is still up in the air right now.

But much of the 51% the House GOP won is concentrated in different areas to the 51% that Bush won. The similarity is really only the topline figures.
---
Re: higher turnout... I think this election was unusual in that there was a higher than usual evangelical turnout as a result of Gay Marriage etc. being on the political agenda.
There was also a higher turnout of non-evangelical voters (not in relative terms though) and if there hadn't been I think Bush would have won by as much as the media over here acted like he did (there coverage was hysterical and acted as though he'd won a landslide).

Turnout is a relative thing I suppose. Like pretty much everything else in politics.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The figures certainly shouldn't be ignored but at the same time it's also possible to read too much into them.

One thing that has changed over that time period, is that the Democrats have been ignoring "O'Neill's Law" more and more as time passes.
Which is daft, as while the GOP is far better organised on a national level (and always will be) the Democrats have better local organisations, many of which are being wasted by idiotic strategists.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Kerry should have based his campaign on bread and butter issues, not try to fight Bush on a field that Bush picked for himself.

Hopefully whoever the Democrats pick in 2008 they won't make the same mistake that Kerry did.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There's very little evidence that the game marriage issued helped Bush significantly. the issue appeared have no appreciable impact in any state.  Bush did no better in states where the issue was on the ballot than he did in states where the issue was not.  The issue also received much wider support then Democrats have been willing to admit.  The 11 amendments averaged 60 plus percent support including huge margins in both Oregon and Michigan, blue stakes. White evangelical conservatives don't even come close to accounting for that

I was talking about Gay Marriage being an issue, I was not talking about the referenda.
Read what I said, not what you appear to want me to say.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There's very little evidence that the game marriage issued helped Bush significantly. the issue appeared have no appreciable impact in any state.  Bush did no better in states where the issue was on the ballot than he did in states where the issue was not.  The issue also received much wider support then Democrats have been willing to admit.  The 11 amendments averaged 60 plus percent support including huge margins in both Oregon and Michigan, blue stakes. White evangelical conservatives don't even come close to accounting for that

I was talking about Gay Marriage being an issue, I was not talking about the referenda.
Read what I said, not what you appear to want me to say.

That's a distinction without a difference.  There's still no evidence that it had an appreciable impact on turnout.  Turn out increase amongst a number of groups who had no apparent pet issue . 
This claim arose as a result of that exit poll question when asked about a moral values.  But moral values can include of a wide variety of sub issues.  The only reason it came out on top is that they listed the other issues as their various sub issues such as the war in Iraq verses the war on terrorism instead of foreign policy as a whole.  The evidence simply doesn't support your conclusion at this time

What evidence? Who's evidence? I'm not basing my claim on exit polling... I would say that the results in numerous rural counties indicate a higher Evangelical turnout.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Probably fraud by both parties