GOP In Grave Danger Of Losing House In 2014, PPP Polls Show

[DonViejo]

Source: HuffPo

Posted: 10/06/2013 7:11 am EDT

Shutting down the government may end up costing Republicans control of the House of Representatives.

A series of polls released Sunday show just how damaging the shutdown has been for the GOP. The liberal-leaning Public Policy Polling compiled two dozen surveys, commissioned and paid for by MoveOn.org Political Action, from House districts around the country, taken from Oct. 2 through Oct. 4. Sample sizes were between 600 and 700 voters in each district.

For Democrats to win a House majority, 17 seats would need to switch to their party's favor. Results show that would be within reach, as Republican incumbents are behind in 17 of the districts analyzed: CA-31, CO-06, FL-02, FL-10, FL-13, IA-03, IA-04, IL-13, KY-06, MI-01, MI-07, MI-11, NY-19, OH-14, PA-07, PA-08, WI-07. In four districts, the incumbent Republican fell behind after respondents were told their representative supported the government shutdown: CA-10, NY-11, NY-23, VA-02. Three districts saw GOP incumbents maintain their hold over their Democratic challengers, even after hearing their elected officials' views on the shutdown, including CA-21, NV-03 and OH-06.

Back in 2012, Democrats picked up eight seats in the House, closing the gap of Republican control to 234-201. For a full breakdown of the PPP surveys, click here.

###

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/06/gop-house-2014-polls_n_4050686.html

[James48]

1. Keep it up....

Three of those seats are in Michigan- where republican control of redistricting made sure (r)'s controlled seats even though more people voted dem-

Good to see people waking up!

[vi5]

2. I don't see it happening.

The reason these shitstains are emboldened to pull these shenanigans in the first place is because they have gerrymandered the country to hell and there's little danger of them actually losing their seats.

[PotatoChip]

16. Gerrymandered seats may not even work for them now.

This could become very interesting.

[Buddha_of_Wisdom]

56. Voter education plus Obamacare (Motor Voter law) allows registration for voters...

will gain even more Democratic voters and see Republicans as an obstacle for the rich and the spoiled.

And it'll be karma once the politically-active billionaires such as Adelson and Koch Brothers and among many others find themselves having to deal with obligations to the American People.

[starroute]

76. Some of these are suburban district where they don't have the same lock

I live in PA-08 which has always been a swing district and received only minor tweaks in the last redistricting. Our current Republican Congressman, Mike Fitzpatrick, is one of those who's gone on record as saying he'd support a continuing resolution that "only" repealed the medical device tax -- which isn't much of a concession but does show he's running scared.

I don't know how many of the other districts listed in the OP are in the same situation, but I suspect many of them are.

As I've pointed out on previous occasions, the problem with gerrymandering everything to a fare-thee-well the way the Republicans have is that it doesn't leave you much room for error. It depends on creating a lot of districts that the GOP is winning by 51% and a relatively smaller number that Democrats are winning by 60%. This works for a while, but it means it takes only minor movements of population or voter sentiment to change the balance.

People talk a lot about "safe" GOP districts, and that may be true in the South or parts of the Midwest where the most radical Tea Partiers come from. But it can't be true in the same way of Pennsylvania or Michigan or California. You can create safe districts or you can create districts that let you hold a majority of the House with a minority of the voters, but you can't do both at once.

[questionseverything]

95. il-13 is listed

and it was supposed to be the downstate dem carve out

we had a great candidate in last election too,dr david gill...the problem was a third party candidate took 7% of the progressive vote

so we ended up with a tea party nut (at least according to the machines and spanish reporting system my town uses)

[Mister Ed]

113. Very, very good point.

You can create safe districts, or you can create districts that let you hold a majority of the House with a minority of the voters, but you can't do both at once.

A Gerrymandered district is engineered not to have an overwhelming preponderance of voters of a certain party, but to have just enough of those voters to make sure it goes for that party.

Those who do the Gerrymandering can't afford overkill. They can't engineer the district to have too many of the party faithful in it. Those voters are needed to swell the ranks of the party in adjacent Gerrymandered districts.

So, in my view, a Gerrymandered district has a certain vulnerability to it. When things change in ways unforeseen by those who did the redistricting - say, when there's a surge of interest among young voters, or minority voters, or voters who just became able to afford health insurance for the first time in years - then maybe, maybe it's enough to tip the scales.

Beyond that, there's an in inexorable tide of shifting demographics. The GOP's base of old, angry white guys is steadily shrinking. You can count me among those who believe that we really are witnessing the death throes of the GOP.

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. Gerrymandering ...

will have an effect; but it might not be enough because this most recent and most visible lunancy has: 1) turned a significant portion of the republican electorate against their republican legislator; 2) caused a wider segment of the population to take notice of what congress is/isn't doing; and, 3) Democrats a little more fired up than is typical during mid-term elections.

So the road to victory is: 1) increasing voter registration of likely Democratic voters, e.g., women, youth, "minorities; 2) work to get these newly registered folks to actually get out to the polls; 3) do not neglect GOTV efforts in other districts; and 4) continue to provide the modern gop opportunities to show their a$$, then make sure everyone sees it.

[seabeckind]

32. Ya know...

I remember a time when it worked that way.

Now Crossroads buys some ads that run locally and totally destroy whichever candidate they want and they're never accountable for what they do.

Doesn't matter whether what they say is true or false...the candidate has to react. And that's all that's necessary.

We need to find a new way.

I thought Occupy was going to be that way. Nope...destroyed just like an unwanted candidate.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. You know what works better than tv ads ...

face to face canvassing, knocking on doors, talking to neighbors, friends, family and the random guy/gal you run into at the super market.

IMO, Occupy was "destroyed" because it had no consistent message that those not involved/engaged could grasp, so others got to define it and the masses got to ignore it ... very few people are going to work to understand your message to decide whether or not to support it.

Candidates, on the other hand, are in the business of defining who they are.

[Duval]

106. I agree. And my

husband and I will be out there doing just that, again!

[Sugarcoated]

120. My husband and I, too

My township is pretty reliably Democrat, so we'll do a day here in our neighborhood, but I think a weekend in the burbs where those vulnerable two Repubs are (PA 0-7 & 0-8) will be time well spent.

It used to be just me doing this stuff, but my husband has been fired up and motivated in the last two Presidentials and midterms, and I'm pretty sure my SIL who's a teacher and many, many of her fellow teachers are chomping at the bit.

[AllyCat]

125. Time to go visit family in WI-07 and do a little canvassing next year

Duffy is awful.

[Bluenorthwest]

63. TV ads are not magic potions. Running more ads is not always a good thing.

Take a look at races like CA governor Brown vs Meg 'Megabucks' Whitman. She spent 10x what he spent on ads, and did so for months while Brown just hung back.
To understand how advertising works in politics, look away from politics and look at other commercial ad campaigns. Is it true that any new product with enough commercials becomes popular? Why no it is not, most of them fail.
Have you ever seen an ad for a movie and wanted to see it, then seen a few more ads and lost the urge to see the film? Do all films with lots of ads succeed or do most of them fail?
The idea that 'all they have to do is buy ads' is an idea that Madison Av, Networks and others would dearly love to be true. But it's not true.

[1StrongBlackMan]

118. I think that was my point. eom

[jeff47]

69. Yeah, remember how President Romney used that to win?

Oh wait....

[JDPriestly]

94. You should post that as an OP.

I especially like this part:

So the road to victory is: 1) increasing voter registration of likely Democratic voters, e.g., women, youth, "minorities; 2) work to get these newly registered folks to actually get out to the polls; 3) do not neglect GOTV efforts in other districts; and 4) continue to provide the modern gop opportunities to show their a$$, then make sure everyone sees it.

See also the OP featuring the words of Rachel Maddow posted here today:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023795595

We have to keep pointing out that the budget compromise was made some time ago (March maybe) and the only issue now is that Republicans are trying to defund the ACA at the last minute.

That is the only issue.

The Republicans are, I understand it, on TV in droves, loud, discourteously interrupting and insisting they are sending a clean bill for each item. They are not sending the agreed-to budget bill. They do not have the votes to repeal the ACA. They are cheating, evading democracy in order to get their way, but they don't have the votes to repeal the ACA.

[pbrower2a]

102. Extremists are always vulnerable in "moderate" districts.

While America has become much more liberal on race, homosexuality, and economics the Republican Party has gone increasingly to the Right -- to what FDR called "the lunatic fringe". Cook PVI shows Republicans having an advantage in districts in which Republicans have even an R+1 lean, and Democrats have a similar advantage in a district with a D+1 lean in a 50-50 election. The sort of person who gets re-elected reliably in about an R+3 district typically has a voting pattern consistent with somewhere between R+10 and D+4. But put someone whose voting pattern is about R+20, and that politician becomes vulnerable.

Politicians who well fit such places as western Nebraska and the Texas Panhandle won a huge number of seats in 2010... and they are showing themselves unsuited for even "R-moderate' districts.

Midterms are not automatic for the conservative party that usually has an advantage in low-turnout elections. The Michigan state legislature has acted as if it were trying to turn Michigan into Oklahoma. The only good that I can say about Oklahoma is that it doesn't get Michigan's nasty winters, and I would rather shovel snow than deal with fascism.

[Agnosticsherbet]

34. Gerrymandering is an effective tool, but can be overridden by voter anger and

Demographic change. Also, not all seats are Gerrymandered.

We may also be seeing signs that a wave election is about to happen. Such elections have been a property of our election system and happen when voter anger reaches a peak.

[KansDem]

40. "Voter anger"

Surely voter suppression and electronic voting machines will take of that...

[Agnosticsherbet]

43. Suppression and Machines work best in low turnout elections.

and don't work evenly across all districts in the United States. There is simply no organization that can reach into every voting district and fix every election.

This article proves nothing by itself. It is a snapshot of voter sentiment in important districts. In 2012, we watched the polls consistently call for an Obama win. Republicans became so upset that they created their own massive conspiracy theory that pollsters were all liberal and skewing the polls. Remember Unskew the polls? Voter suppression and Voting machines do not always do their trick.

GOTV can and will make a big difference.

[Left Coast2020]

77. Exactly!!!!

Thats why we have to positively, absolutely turnout. They are expecting a low turnout in a midterm. WE have to show WE have people over money.

[Cal33]

127. But gerrymandeing is only one of the numerous dirty tricks (some

of which are actually criminal) that the GOP uses. Put them all
together, and their chances of winning go up. If all the elections
had been fair and square, the Republicans would have won very
few (if any) in the past 50 years.

Without dishonesty and corruption, GOP just can't win.

[Agnosticsherbet]

128. Actually, they win in the south, everywhere in the Republic of Foxistan ruled by Rupert Murdoch

and his Saudi Partners, and because of propaganda and the religion of Conservativism.

We will not get rid of dishonesty and corruption since these are universal to the human experience. So we need to find ways to work around them. The best way is to GOTV.

[Cal33]

129. Yes, the South is pretty solidly Republican, as are some Mid-Western states. I

was mainly thinking of Federal Gov't elections, taking the nation as whole.

[Agnosticsherbet]

130. That would require a Constitutional amendment.

Though it is a good idea.

[Progressive dog]

67. Gibson in NY 19 would have been gone in 2012

if we'd had a stronger Democratic candidate. Our district was more Republican when Kirsten Gillibrand was our Rep.

[Drunken Irishman]

91. They gerrymandered seats in the 90s to keep the House...

It didn't help in 2006. If the wave is big enough, it will overcome gerrymandering seats.

[progressoid]

107. And even in a couple non-gerrymandered districts, I can't see this happening.

At least in one of the IA districts (04-steve king), we had a decent opponent to him and he still won. Iowa has a very fair system of dividing the electorate, but like minded people flock together. That district is polluted with crazy RWers and they love to vote.

[Gman]

3. Its hardly "grave danger"

if the Dems have to pick up all 17 of 21 seats where the Repub is behind.

That's how well they gerrymandered their districts. That's what happened when people sat on their hands in 2010.

[DonViejo]

5. Agree! But, it's a typical Huffington Post BS headline and LBN rules...

say it must be the same as the article.

[Gman]

15. and my comments were directed to the substance of the Huffington Post article

and not the fact you posted it or what you had to do to post it. I was unclear about that. I agree on the BS headline.

[DonViejo]

52. I wasn't being defensive; merely complaining about the headline eom

[Bjorn Against]

31. Actually they only have to pick up 17 of 235 seats

They only polled 24 seats and Dems were leading in 21 of the 24. While it is true that many of the ones they did not poll are very safe Republican seats, I would be very surprised if all of them are safe.

[1StrongBlackMan]

59. +1 ...

But what's missing is clear statements regarding holding Democratic seats. For instance, I live in a very purple district (Tucson) in an extremely red state (Arizona). We are curently represented by Ron Barber, a Democrat; but he will be facing a challenge by McSally, who he narrowly beat in the election to complete Gifford's term. It is AS important to hold that seat as it is to flip gop seats.

[Bjorn Against]

61. That is certainly true, races like Barber's will be important

I think Barber is actually going to do better in the coming election than he did in the last, but that district can not be taken for granted and resources will need to be placed there.

[1StrongBlackMan]

68. I keep flipping between ...

"He'll do better" and "It's gonna be a tough slog"; only because he has not been very visible and the modern gop and their supporters are given to myth believing ... and they are hard at work building the McSally mythology ... "she's a small government, war hero, don'tcha know!" ... to which I respond, "A war hero that sued the air force, alleging what you claim doesn't exist AND has never worked anywhere BUT in the government that she wishes to make smaller, collecting a government pension that she doesn't believe other government workers should have and receives government healthcare that she opposes."

[Left Coast2020]

79. What baffels me is why do they show which districts are shakey?

We are not the only people who read this information. Thats like showing your poker hand to other players. Oh Yeah! I'm working on a straight flush...See!

[seabeckind]

49. I don't think that's true...

the "sit on their hands" was an attempt to shift the blame for the loss of the house to us. And it worked in some cases.

The beauty of a really good gerrymandering is that it doesn't matter if the opposition shows up in an overwhelming number, that number is not enough. Never.

I was first gerrymandered in the 70's. From that time on it never mattered whether I showed up or not. The R always won and won by a wide margin. If every dem who'd died in the last century could have voted, Burton would have still won.

That's what gerrymandering does.

Don't blame the victim.

BTW, I was thrilled to vote and be involved the 10 years we lived in WA...it was glorious. Even met Gregoire and spoke with Inslee. I felt like a real person. Then we moved back to IN. Deliberately chose a home that was in Andre Carson's district. My wife had known his grandmother.

Got my ballot and...WTF? Here we go again. Hello Susan Brooks. What a tool. All the charm of Burton and half the intelligence. (On a scale of 1 to 10, a minus 6)

[adavid]

62. Any chance that whackjob

mike pence will lose reelection?

[1StrongBlackMan]

65. Fact is ...

there REALLY WAS a segment of liberals that REALLY DID "seat on their hands" to "teach (President) Obama and Democrats a lesson." Their hand seating was felt not so much in whether they voted, or not; but more their constant criticism of President Obama and Democrats, their constant "No Difference/Two sides of the same coin" refrain, and their constant "I'm never going to vote for Democrats again" lines. This talk doesn't affect politically engaged folks; but it has a big effect on folks that are less engaged ... when they see folks that they know ARE engaged, giving up ... they are far more likely to seat at home.

[jaysunb]

85. +1 n/t

[Doctor_J]

93. oh, wrong again

just like every other time you posted this. The polls, almost all of them, show that it was the new voters in 2008 that sat out 10. And they were not"teaching the president a lesson". They realized that the change they were promised was largely bs, and that the democrats, even with huge majorities in congress and the white house, couldn't or wouldn't fight the right.

[1StrongBlackMan]

117. I think you ...

just proved my "wrong again" point.

[Berlum]

4. Never is history has a political party so richly deserved a diaper-load of karma

[StoneCarver]

6. As I said before,

I wonder if this is the medicine the Repubs are taking to rid themselves of the Tea Party! Long term they may lose one election but there is no other way to get rid of the wood-tick. After losing the next election, they can say to the Tea Party "sit down and shut up" we tried your way and we lost. The Tea Party will have no one else to vote for. (Sort of like Teacher Unions and the Democratic Party.)

[Benton D Struckcheon]

8. No, even if this were to happen,

they'd continue to wield influence. Spector in PA was undone by a candidate who was put up by The Club For Growth, who were the Tea Party before there was one. Even back then the Repubs had to watch for that group, who had a habit of putting up extremist candidates in primaries who would win the primary and then lose in the general. While that's still a danger for the Senate, the gerrymandering is the honey that goes with the Tea Party in the House. So more than likely the course in the future is that the Senate becomes gradually more Dem while the House continues, by whatever margin, to be Rep.

[Lasher]

36. Chances are, Republicans will take the Senate next year.

History is against us. First of all, midterm turnout has historically been low - not a good thing for Democrats. Additionally we'll face the six year itch effect: In 5 of the 6 post-World War II midterm elections that occurred during a president’s second term, the party in the White House has lost substantial numbers of House and/or Senate seats.

The numbers are against us too. Assuming Democrat Corey Booker wins the NJ special election as predicted in 10 days, we'll have 55 Democrats (including 2 independents who caucus with us) and 45 Republicans in the Senate. Of all incumbents up for re-election 13 months from now, there will be 22 Democrats and 14 Republicans. We'll have a lot more seats at risk than they will, and the GOP would have to pick up just 6 seats to gain the majority.

We'll be very lucky indeed if we manage to retain our Senate Majority next year.

[lostincalifornia]

39. interesting, they said that would happen in 2012 also. I don't buy the "chances are" premise, and

the reason why is they cannot gerrymander the Senate like they can the house

[ffr]

45. I agree. If there's forethought put into voter registration drives and GOTV

Dems could take majorities or greater majorities in both houses.

Reps primarily win due to voter apathy. Get them to the polls and we win. Simple as that.

[Left Coast2020]

80. Thank you.

Thats what I've been saying for the past few months. People are pissed at the Party of Greed. And now with the latest antics is a sour mood by voters: no jobs bill, or bill on climate change, etc. I'm feeling a larger turnout is at play here--as an optimist.

[lostincalifornia]

92. If markets fall and the economy collapses, this will be laid at the rethugs feet

[Benton D Struckcheon]

41. Maybe. It will depend on how this shutdown thing plays out too.

I can't see a scenario where the GOP comes out looking good, and as Senate races are statewide, it would be tough to dodge or dance around a question like "What would you have done in the shutdown?" if posed to a GOP challenger in those races.

[Lasher]

57. That is a good point.

The one exception to the six year itch effect was the 1998 midterms. There's no impeachment for voters to resent now, but I do see some similarity. Namely, Republicans are being heavy handed and shutting down government during a moderate Democrat's second term. Now if the economy would just pick up we might have something going.

[strategery blunder]

104. If the Rs push this out long enough

and force Obama to use the 14th to keep the country's bills paid, oh there will be.

The teahadists will go nuts and the House will impeach. It will go nowhere in the Senate but if Obama must resort to drastic measures simply to keep the government minimally functional, it will be 1998 on steroids.

[StoneCarver]

51. I disagree History is against us.

Where are the Whigs and Federalists? Through our short history the conservatives are always replaced by a more liberal party. Right now it's the Republicans turn to disappear (like the Whigs and Federalists). The Democrats will be the new conservative party. B.O. is a moderate Republican (who's more conservative than Nixon, at least Nixon created the EPA.). The Republicans are doomed much like the dinosaurs was -they just don't know it.

[Recursion]

11. Unfortunately, it would have the opposite effect: the few remaining moderate Repubs will lose

Which would give the crazies even more influence in the caucus. The mind shudders.

[1StrongBlackMan]

42. I have to agree with ...

the others ... a republican loss will do nothing to alter the path of the modern gop. The lesson they took from 2012 was their candidates weren't conservative enough.

But this is part and parcel of extremism ... In your mind, your political losses are not because majorities reject you agenda; it's because majorities just don't understand how "right" you are ... so it's just a matter of keep doing what you're doing and the others will see the light.

[City Lights]

7. Too bad we're not voting next month.

By 2014, many Uhmurikans will have forgotten all about the shutdown, and the GOPee will have ginned up more reasons for their brainless followers to keep them in office.

[Bibliovore]

22. Exactly. Which means...

...it falls to the Democratic Party, grassroots organizations, and committed individuals to not let the forgetful electorate forget this particular debacle -- and how little those who engineered it care about the people they're supposed to represent, be they Americans or Uhmurikans. If nothing else, I look forward to some wonderful campaign ads.

[Codeine]

9. Wishful thinking. Skillful gerrymandering ensures otherwise. nt

[Ikonoklast]

73. Gerrymandering doesn't work going forward. Change still continues after districts are re-drawn.

Gerrymandering is a backwards solution, and those that do it hope for stasis.

[Courtesy Flush]

87. Huh?

Say what you will, but gerrymandering exists -- backwards as it may be. Calling it backwards doesn't make it disappear.

In key states, democrats received more votes than republicans, yet they still got fewer seats. Polling has to be done district by district because doing it state by state will give misleading results.

[Robb]

10. Those numbers look good, actually.

I wasn't buying the headline, but a lot of these races start out with the incumbent GOPers in trouble. And things get worse for them as the shutdown enters the picture.

I know Colorado's 6th is going to be a heck of a race, there's a well-known Democrat challenging this year and an incumbent Repub with a lot of birther baggage to overcome -- in a sensible, increasingly blue district that's suffering under the shutdown.

[Recursion]

12. Yeah, normally this is based on a generic ballot

The fact that this is based on actual district polling is a good sign.

[pangaia]

13. This assumes, of course,

that we are still having elections by 2014.

[mountain grammy]

14. A little fear that's been lurking in my head too!

[leftyohiolib]

18. that'll be their next move

[Agnosticsherbet]

37. Every two years I keep hearing this from one side or the other,

and yet we are still limping along having elections.

We had elections during the civil war, World War I, World War II, and there will be elections in 2014 even if Republicans keep the government shut down through he midterms. (Elections in our system are ran by the states not the federal government.)

[reACTIONary]

75. +1 (nt)

[searchingforlight]

17. Nothing that happens before next Spring will effect voting.

The American people have very short memories. Look at how quickly we have moved on from the headlines of the last few months.

[Democat]

19. Does Huffington Post call Fox "conservative leaning" whenever they're mentioned?

They call PPP "liberal leaning".

[Nanjing to Seoul]

20. Too early to make an impact, but it's a good start for building blocks

Keep it up, GOP. . .you will soon lose your House majority too. And gerrymandering doesn't work in the Senate.

[Octobrist]

21. Check out the front-page headline on HuffPo

Dear GOP:
Watch out! You might get what you're after!

[DFW]

23. Nice, but at this point, this is little more than cheerleading

Gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement and billions in dirty Republican money will not be easy obstacles to overcome.

The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can start to do whatever we can to countermand it.

[tosh]

25. I see 3 FL districts

including my own. We were BLUE (dog) before '10.

[heaven05]

26. fingers crossed

but with all the people willing to vote against their own self interest based on one reason:race, I don't, with the gerrymandering and voter suppression, hold out much hope. But who knows, Americans are full of surprises.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

27. Perhaps. What effect will signing another let's-send-jobs-to-foreign-countries agreement (TPP) have?

[vinny9698]

28. The Driving Force in the 2014 Elections Will Be Obama Care

The success of Obama Care will drive the elections. By that time millions of people will have health insurance and will like it. Now the election will be about vote for the GOP and have them take away your health care. It will become like the third rail SS and Medicare.

[seabeckind]

29. It doesn't matter.

Even if the R loses in the state district, the D doesn't win. The demographics in the districts have been skewed so badly and the money behind the candidate has been skewed so badly that a true man of the people cannot win.

That person cannot even get into the state gov't. And if the person does, (s)he will be marginalized so much that they will either give up or die at their desk, never moving on, just someone whose district moves more and more to make him irrelevant.

We need a change in the way our representation happens...but that change will never occur because we are in the grip of 2 parties.

And those 2 parties are in the grip of people who have them on speed dial. The only time they talk to the people is right before they walk into the voting booth.

Neither party will change the rules because each party wants to use the rules the way they are. Just biding their time.

The system is rigged. It's like profootball. You sit on one side...the opposition sits on the other side. The PRICs have the exec box (that you bought them, BTW) and they win no matter who wins on the field. And don't even think about player loyalty. They play for money, not honor. They left that way back when that first scout showed up at their high school.

[underpants]

35. Great post

+

[Zambero]

30. At what point will wingnuts be "primaried"?

If the GOP loses the House in 2014 and its attributed to the extreme positions demanded by radical Tea party members and/or candidates, could pragmatism possibly sink in, giving so-called "moderate" Republicans an advantage in future races? If this is the only way the GOP can remain competitive, or risk putting the presidency and both houses of congress out of reach, a course reversal would not surprise me that much.

[underpants]

38. I agree - the only real chance the Dems have

Is for the incumbents R to get out tea bagged and the R"s nominate someone so repulsive that establishment Repubs stay home or, unlikely, actually vote dem. Look at the Gov race here in Va- Bolling (Lt. gov) would have been a shoe-in but they switched to a convention so they could nominate Cuccinelli. Now it is a race and McAuliffe looks like he might win.

[seabeckind]

44. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils mean you're still voting for evil.

Apologies to the author of that. I read it recently and can't remember the source. Happens a lot these days. Getting old sucks but it beats the alternative (that source I remember, one of Jimmy Carter's books).

In any world other than this one, McAuliffe would be a minor player in some politicians campaign.

Some choice. Oh well, he'll throw us a bone once in a while so I guess it could be worse.

[jeff47]

70. Never.

When moderates lose, the Republicans react by saying "He/She wasn't pure enough". And they lurch right.

This will continue until the extremists destroy the Republican party, and it goes the way of the Whigs.

[Rain Mcloud]

33. It is a simple fact of life,if you do not pay your bills,you get kicked out of your house.

This is known by everyone who ever did an honest days work.

[lovuian]

46. We are witnessing the collapse of the greedy GOP

the approval rating of Congress is 5 % with an over 90% disapproval rating

and I believe woman will be a very important voting group

I believe the Democrats will take over the House....Americans are tired of the House and Senate at odds with each other

[seabeckind]

53. Remembering high school algebra

these numbers mean that people are also pissed at the democrats.

I for one definitely am.

Reid giving up the sequester level funding before starting negotiations?

F' him.

[Left Coast2020]

82. Another hammer hits nail on head.

Keeping shutdown in constant view of public "hurts" repukes and Boner. And they know this. Hats off to CNN and MSNBC for the constant attention.

[WinstonSmith4740]

47. My district is NV 3

Joe Heck. Just goes to show just how stupid these people are. He's at a basic dead heat in favorability, 44/43, Tea Party favorability he's behind, 42/47, 42/52 on the shutdown, 42/49 on debt default, but he's still favored against a generic Democrat for 2014 49/46. Seriously, these people would vote for a dead dog as long as the initial after their name is an "R". I love rural living, but sometimes I feel like I'm surrounded by morons.

[RoccoR5955]

50. I sure hope that we can do something in NY-19.

I surely would like to see that slick RepubliCON out on his keister. All the lies he has stated, yet he is still somewhat popular here.
We had a great Congressman for quite some time, I hope that we can get another. Our country needs one.

[Buddha_of_Wisdom]

54. A massive loss for the Republicans should get them out of the majority for good

tiny minority of right-wing fuckwads has no more say in the government. if they don't like it, Somalia is avaliable for them to move to.

[Buddha_of_Wisdom]

55. CO-6 has been redistricted and we have a solid challenger ready to kick out Mike Coffman

count on Mr. Coffmann to lose his seat in '14. Along with the 'baggers that recalled Morse and Giron along with *even* more Republicans to lose their seats for good.

Andrew Romanoff has been my state rep and a fine Speaker of the House when he was working... so I think he's got a great chance.

Romanoff would have been our Senator instead of Bennet if Obama hadn't endorsed that moron.

[Sunlei]

58. republicans going to have to spend billions to cheat, scam and gerrymander for votes.

[ashling]

60. "If the 2014 elections were held today"

Lot of time . . . . . . but we can hope

[abq e streeter]

64. I liked the "GOP in grave" part the best.

[gopiscrap]

66. Excellent

[andym]

71. 17 seats would provide a one seat majority

if one of the vacant seats stays Democratic--Right now its 232 to 200 with 3 vacant seats. A one seat majority in such a toxic environment for the GOP, would show just how badly the most GOP districts are gerrymandered.

[CBHagman]

72. That means we're going to have to redouble efforts to bring this about...

...and also hold on to the Senate.

[tofuandbeer]

74. Now Bohner is using the Default as a weapon...

Boehner: No 'Clean' Votes on Reopening Government or Debt Ceiling Without Negotiations with President Obama
http://news.yahoo.com/boehner-no-clean-votes-reopening-government-debt-ceiling-145746667--abc-news-topstories.html

This was probably their ultimate plan.

[LonePirate]

78. In one year, all of this will be forgotten and the extortionists will still retain their majority

Voters have a very short memory and Republicans turn out in at better rates in mid-terms than do Democrats and Independents.

PPP or the other pollsters should track all of these races for the next year and then report back once they swing back to the red column. I suspect some of them will be safely R again once the budget\debt limit deal is reached later this month.

[seabeckind]

81. Voter turnout

My apologies to 1strongblackman for responding here instead of directly to his comment. I felt that the point is important and thought it might be buried in the tete-a-tete above.

Yes, you can point a finger at the dems who didn't turn out in 2010. We definitely lost the house and there definitely were disillusioned democrats.

But I think that deflects from the real issue. It is blaming the results of an event rather than the cause of the event. Why did those dems feel disillusioned? Is it because they were given a false choice of candidates or was it laziness? The accusation is laziness and I think that's a crock. Maybe a small percentage but most people aren't like that...there have to be other factors.

Let's take my state. I was given a choice between Mourdock, a total tp moron who has had his head jammed up his ass so long he sees shit everywhere, and Donnelly.

Let's look at Donnelly...he was anti-abortion. I thought that put him outside the stated platform of the Democratic party. Now let's say I am a person who is avidly women's rights (a true statement, BTW) and refuses to compromise that position (I'm also pragmatic -- and that makes me feel dirty).

What would I do? If I vote for Donnelly I am supporting an anti-abortion agenda and compromising.

No, sir, let's put blame exactly where it belongs. The gotp has been accused of applying a litmus test and they do it with a passion. We, OTOH, say we've got a big tent and welcome all. Seems like that's a mighty big camel shoving his nose in our tent.

Let's take the cause a little further. I became disillusioned when I saw the cabinet appointments in late 2008. Not enough to keep me from voting for the dem. And not enough to keep me from voting for Obama in 2012...but definitely enough so that I had to really hold my nose.

Way past time to put our foot down (knowing that we're the only ones wearing our picket walking shoes) and insist on a real democrat.

[noiretextatique]

99. excellent post

How much can you compromise your principles...and still have them? I am blessed to be able to vote for Barbaras Lee and Boxer without compromise. But in your situation, I could not blame you for not voting for the odious D...who could? When I am faced with that choice, I choose a Green.

[samsingh]

83. i would hardly call that 'grave' - it's a delightful and necessary outcome

the gop no longer has the right to call themselves an American political party.

[oxymoron]

84. K&R

[Zorra]

86. Republicans are, in general, simply incapable of governing effectively and efficiently. nt

[kestrel91316]

88. Sweet.

[dickthegrouch]

89. Sometimes the best thing to do

Is give a hefty shove!

I hope all of EarlG's Pics of the day become campaign ads next year and for the foreseeable future until the GOP is completely buried.

[orbitalman]

90. Continue Forth

[indepat]

96. Life in these parts of the western world will never be the same should Rethuglicans lose control

of the House in '14.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

97. They'll claim Democrats are gonna steal your guns and money and make your kids gay,..as always.

[BlueToTheBone]

98. Another way to say it "Democrats Poised to Retake House

in 2014"

As if this is just about pukers.

[valerief]

100. Grave danger of losing? To whom? Losing wouldn't endanger America. nt

[pbrower2a]

101. "My" rep could be going down!

MI-07, which contains the gigantic Michigan State University (East Lansing) should be in reach for a competent Democrat this time. I can almost see the pitch -- how about someone who represents YOU and not out-of-state interests who pull his strings?

For good reason, Tim Walberg (Reactionary, MI-07) has the nickname "Wall Street Wally".

[grantcart]

103. We should keep it up until it says "GOP in grave"

[Cha]

105. If anybody deserved to lose their jobs it's these assholes from

hell. A real special breed of ruthless monsters.

thanks DV

[Beartracks]

108. But be vigilant anyway! AND.... also at the STATE levels!!!!! n/t

[Ash_F]

109. Great, we can secure a majority then get back to licking GOP boots....

...then lose the majority within a term or two due to backlash from the general populace for licking said boots.

...wait about a decade for Republican rule to push the country to a breaking point, again

...regain the majority again and start licking


The circle of American life.

[zentrum]

110. But they are safe for all eternity...

...in their own districts. They gerrymandered to be in low population, high Glenn Beckian areas. These climate-denying, pro-gun, anti-evolution, homophobic voters will never go Democratic. Just a few baggers is all the House needs to keep eating the country from within like termites.

Koch knows this. The brothers only need to fund the campaigns of a small number of individuals to continue this coup.

[blkmusclmachine]

111. Black box vote counters to the rescue!

Whoever owns the machines, owns the vote.

[Marthe48]

112. Let's do this!

We can do all we can to help the lemmings run over the cliff.

[HughBeaumont]

114. Proud to be the 100th Rec!!

Sick of these obstructionists.

[NewJeffCT]

115. If Republicans keep having their temper tantrums

they'll turn off a lot of the moderates, and hopefully get the ones that do vote to vote Democratic.

but, with all the gerrymandering and the RW media power, I'd be happy if we picked up a few seats in the House and held on to the Senate, leaving us poised for a big jump in 2016.

[Hekate]

116. Pubs will only lose if Democrats GOTV; the gerrymandered districts will be brutal even if we do GOTV

Even so, this is very hopeful news: 2014 is much closer than 2016. I say that because the GOP is counting on Americans having short memories, by the time the Presidential primaries roll around, when it comes to GOP shenanigans this year.

[tavalon]

119. That shouldn't be a danger, that should be a done deal

[Kablooie]

121. I'm not so sure.

I heard a British reporter on NPR who interviewed random New Yorkers about their opinions regarding the shutdown.

Almost none of them had any opinion.
They thought it was just politician squabbling and it will get sorted out so they don't pay any attention.
Many didn't even know there was a shutdown.

Not encouraging.

[Hulk]

122. Why do I feel this is all hype BS?

Probably because the 2014 elections are light years away, and this is silly talk. Yes, it would be great. Would I bet a dollar on it? Hell no. Why even waste space discussing such a subject. Let's go with the flow, make plans for attacking when the time comes, and STOP showing our "wish-cards" until reality sets in. I get frustrated with this sort of information. I'd label it as "mis-information", simply because it means NOTHING at this point and time.

[DallasNE]

123. IA-04 -- aka Steven King

King 45 - Democrat 49

Not sure how much I trust this as at this stage I cannot see an unnamed Democrat at almost 50%. But I like to dream.

[ramapo]

124. November 2014 is a long, long, long way off

Putting any stock in, even reading, these polls is simply a waste of time and energy.

[workinclasszero]

126. I don't want to abolish the Republican party. I simply want to reduce it to the size

where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub!