Gibbs comments about the GOP taking back the house are brilliant.

[Dawgs]

Not because I think Gibbs said it on purpose, but more because of how the GOP and the media will react to them.

Cantor has already agreed with Gibbs; which gives everyone a benchmark to go by in this election. The media will most certainly make the case that everyone in America is disappointed with the Dems, and it will be a landslide night for the GOP when they take back the House. Anything less than taking back control of Congress will be seen as a failure.

The good news is only the most extreme models show the GOP winning back either house. I personally think the models showing the Dems doing better is much more likely than anything else.

So,...

I welcome it, and I think every Dem should just keep quiet about it.

It might make for a very enjoyable election night.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's more over-confidence. This time in the Senate.

http://www.thesunnews.com/2010/07/14/1584971/demint-open-to-leadership-role.html

"There will probably be 10 or 15 new conservatives in the Senate, and then what happens after that we'll just have to wait and see.", U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint(R).

[OHdem10]

1. Nancy Pelosi was really ticked according to some earlier posts.

It just gave GOP some more talking points.

Vandehigh was explaining how it helps GOP raise money.

[Pirate Smile]

2. He said they "could" not that they "would" but the reporting on this is sloppy, as usual.

[zipplewrath]

6. It was hard to tell

he was potentially just acknowledging the technical possibility, trying not to appear to arrogant or over confident. Or he was throwing a piece of raw meat out there for the political hacks to chew on for a while. Or he though it might "energize the base". Sounds like he forgot to vet it with Pelosi though.

[johnaries]

19. Right, all he said was that there were enough seats in play.

It was the Republicans putting their usual twist.

[damntexdem]

3. Great, except: too many voters want to vote on the "winning side."

So when "everyone" expects some side to win, many will vote for that side just for that stupid reason.

[SkyDaddy7]

4. I agree and disagree...

I agree that Gibbs comment is brilliant...However, I disagree that Gibbs did not say it on purpose! Basically, anything less is a win for the Democrats! Plus, given what I have seen here it appears many Democrats will stay home because they feel Obama & the Dems are sellouts or whatever other term used from the long list I have seen used here on DU.

Kinda sad folks would just give up after 18 months but that appears to be the case for many. SAD!

Like Obama has said multiple times during the campaign it took a long time to get to where we are and it will take a long time to change.

[Dawgs]

5. I wouldn't use DU as a representative of most Democrats.

We'll see.

:hi:

[SkyDaddy7]

9. HOPEFULLY, you are 100% correct!

:toast: :hi:

[KingFlorez]

7. It raises the bar for what the GOP has to do

Right now, I don't see the GOP picking up enough seats for a majority and when they don't achieve that, it will create more infighting. Boehner will be out and the far-right will fight for the leadership. If the likes of Mike Pence or Michele Bachmann became GOP Leader, it would be a gift Democrats.

[Beetwasher]

8. Of Course He Said It On Purpose, Just AboutEverything A Press Secretary Says It's Carefully Measured

And yes, it was a smart move and sets the stakes and creates a high hurdle.

The Repubs will not come close to taking back the house and it will now be seen as a collassal failure if they don't.

[sabrina 1]

11. If it was a smart move, why is Nancy Pelosi so angry about it?

And it's not the first time she's had to talk to the WH about the way they denigrate Democrats in public.

It was a stupid move, and Pelosi is right to be angry, not just about that comment but about the constant conflating of Democrats with Republicans by the president, when he slams DC for 'partisanship', accusing BOTH parties of it.

This is why Democrats constantly fail to take advantage even when they win. They refuse to face reality. The reality is that when a WH press sec. tells the American people that the other party could win the next election, the people hear defeatism. All they hear is 'he is acknowledging the failur of his own party'. And they don't hear the difference between 'could' and 'will'. Sorry.

Gibbs is a terrible press sec. imho. He's bland and often seems overwhelmed by reporters questions. Like telling the world that the President has not power over BP because they are a 'private Corp'. That incensed Americans as it was an acknowledgement of the corporate takeover of our government.

[Beetwasher]

12. Kabuki-I Understand Politically Naive Types Don't Get What's Going On, But That's Ok

It's apparent to me that a lot of people just don't get how the game is played. It's over their heads.

Oh, guess you missed this:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/pelosi-makes-nice-with-the-white-house/?src=twt&twt=thecaucus

Amid reports of discord between the White House and her caucus, Ms. Pelosi, the House speaker, called Robert Gibbs’ comments on NBC’s “Meet the Press” unfortunate at her Thursday news conference. But she also complimented the White House’s efforts to help Democrats stay in the majority in the House — and indicated that she believes President Obama will be a presence on the stump as Democrats work toward that goal.

“There is absolutely no reason to think that the White House has been anything but cooperative with us in terms of our political efforts to retain control of the Congress,” the California Democrat said.

[suzie]

13. +1

[sabrina 1]

14. So, who are they playing to with this risky business? The

American people are not interested in political games, they want things done by the people they elected. We are not all 'political operatives' who are required to make excuses, or 'get' that this is just a game or whatever.
?
He said what he said, and that's what the people heard and they really do not even want to know what goes on or what is on the minds of people 'inside DC'.

When you have to keep explaining something, then it didn't quite work the way you intended. And reading your link, Pelosi should not even have to explain that she believes the president will be working for them. Why did she have to explain it? BECAUSE of the huge question mark about the behavior of the WH, asked by many Congressional Democrats, in relation to those up for reelection in the Fall.

[Beetwasher]

16. I'd Say Republicans Went For It Hook Line And Sinker

If they don't win back the House (and they won't) any gains are still a huge failure. And boy, are they crowing about how they're taking back the house now! Talk about raised expectations!

Also, Dems who may not have been paying attention, now realize the stakes.

Pretty simple really if you think about it.

[okieinpain]

10. well I'm disappointed in how president staff has handled

things. I think he could have been a little more vocal about the jobs issue, and they totally blew it on handling the pr on the gulf spill. he can still look for bi-partisan support on issues while hammering the repugs at the same time. hell they do it all the time.

[craigmatic]

15. This kind of tactic is dangerous because it could depress dem turn out. It sounds defeatist.

[RBInMaine]

17. Typical media creation. Just said it was mathematically possible, NOT probable. Way overdone.

[OhioBlue]

18. I agree. n/t