Democrats Scale Back Ambitions for House

WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 — Strategists, independent analysts and House members of both parties say that after a decade out of power, Democrats are unlikely to reclaim control of the House in November.

Many Democrats now concede that their immediate goal is far less ambitious: to narrow the divide so they have a better chance of recapturing the House in 2006.

"Do I think we are going to take it back? No," said Representative Rahm Emanuel, Democrat of Illinois. "But I think we are setting it up not to slide backward, but to move forward."

Democrats said they were heartened that President Bush had found himself on the defensive recently, and predicted that the record deficit compiled under Republican control could play to their benefit. But Democrats and others cited significant factors working against them, including recruiting failures, fund-raising difficulties and redistricting.

One major reason Democrats are pessimistic about taking back the House can be found in Texas. In redrawing the boundaries of Congressional districts last year in favor of Republicans, the Texas Legislature built a fire wall against potential losses elsewhere in the country. The formerly Democratic-dominated House delegation from Texas is now evenly divided, with 16 members of each party, and Republicans say they hope to end up with a minimum of 20 seats. That number, they say, would better reflect the state's political bent.

more…
http://nytimes.com/2004/02/29/politics/campaign/29HOUS.html

This is what is wrong.

Always emphasising the negative GOP spin. They always buy into it and then wonder why they lose.

At least under Pelosi they are starting--however faltingtly--to do thing right.

The Senate Dems don't even know what the fuck is going on

House Republicans have raised $77 million vs. $30 million for House Democrats. That's math, not spin.

And the redistricting in Texas will result in a net gain of 5 seats for the Pubs.

Until we stop putting money into a thousand different places, glorifying vanity candidates, and eating our own for breakfast, we'll keep getting our ass kicked. The other side is playing for keeps, if you haven't noticed.

Reality bites.

Recruitment is a big problem. Recent analysis in Florida shows that dems could take up to 35 state house seats, but we can't find anyone to run for them.

I personally am running for the US House in the 9th district, but have no cash, and it don't look good for that. But I'm planning on running grasssroots campaign against a 20 year incumbent, who nobody likes, but the vote for him anyway.

cash is a huge problem for Democrats everywhere.

We have the same problem there.

Honestly, there needs to be serious reform of how seats in the House are partitioned out... proportional representation by state, perhaps. I don't know. It just needs massive, massive fixing.

redistricting and the state districts are not gerrymandered. They are basically rectangular and the sizes and shapes vary only to accommodate the population densities of different areas of the states (cities versus rural areas).

...I don't mind, but my district was scooped out of a swing area, and attached by a strand to a larger democratic district 15 miles away. The only thing that bothers me, is that my new representative has no interest in this small swing area. He also tends to be a very conservative democrat, where the dems in my area tend to be both rural and left wing Quaker types.

would be so hated by the general population that no one would vote repub for a century. But, alas, they are more the enabling party then the opposition party.

Here we have an occupant of the WH with very little coattails at all who's pissed off many in his own party. I'd say we'd have a perfect time to make major gains in the House. We just need party leadership with the ranch eggs to take advantage of this golden opportunity.

where is it?

C'mon folks, ever heard of David v. Goliath. We can do it.

with re-districting I'm not surprised...

for a change.. If they presented a unified front and talked about the damage that the "republican revolution" has done to the US, they might attract some attentions..

They are more interested in the biennial game of musical chairs, than they are at any real legislation for the average person out here..

They get elected on a Tuesday, and on Wednesday, they are out gathering money for the "next" one.. That does not leave much time for much else..

It's pretty telling that a job that pays 150k a year, costs MILLIONS to "win".. There's much more in it for them, than for US :(

are conceding defeat before the campaigns have even started, geesh! With that attitude it ought to be a self fullfilling prophecy. There are TONS of reasons to get the extreme rightwing out of power in the House and victory IS possible, but there needs to be a fighting spirit in order for it to happen.

getting Bu$hCo out of the WH.

If our party leaders don't believe in the party then they should be canned. With dems like these, who needs repugs?

BTW: In the past, it cost about 5x'a more for every repug vote than a dem vote. This time around, I don't think even god will have enough money to buy anything more than hardcore repug votes.

Plus the 2004 election has two wildcards and we do not know yet what their impact will be. The first is the repug destruction of our voting system over the last 4 years. With touch screen voting you will never be sure who really won.

However, the 2nd Wild Card is the Internet and the impact it is having on public opinion. It blows me away when I met someone who was never interested in politics or even a former repug and they tell me all the reasons why they won't vote for Bu$h. Excluding the dittoheads, I think enough people are much better informed than we realize.

These are the kinds of messages dems need to spread, not crap about how we can't even try to win. We have to assume that we can't lose and act accordingly.

instead of ones about our plans for a national fundraising effort to combat the GOP, toe-to-toe, for every damn seat that is up for grabs? Especially in freakin' Texas?

We can't get good candidates because we can't back them financially! And much of what financial resources we DO have, come from the same corporate sponsors that fund the GOP!

That is what is wrong with America today.

If ten million Democrats give an average of one hundred dollars, we would have a billion dollars. And I said average...some give ten, some give a thousand. And ten million is only 20 percent of our potential contribution base! I don't care if we have to beat on doors like Jehovah's Witnesses, something needs to happen here.

And don't post me back with, 'when the wolf is at the door stories', as an excuse-because people who really ARE in that position are going to be the first to dig deep for those fives, tens and twenty's! Their need is not your excuse.

Later, once we get candidates who have been funded this way into office, maybe we can do something systemic, to nullify the GOP funding advantage.

And we really need to take the fight to them in Texas, after the way they blatantly gerrymandered that state. Texas is the heart and soul of the corporate/oil interests that underpin the Bush administration.

We should declare a crusade to liberate Texas-and it's hordes of slaveworkers-from the GOP. Texas is the heart of darkness, as far as I am concerned. It is the center of our adversary's power. Strike at the heart.