Michael Barone goes through House races (about 50) and predicts (his analysis equals the best in "scientific" polling) an almost evenly divided House: 219 Democrats, a net gain of 16, and 216 Republicans. Also this: "My predictions also suggest, correctly, that I do not see this, at least yet, as a ’wave’ election. In a ’wave’ election, the winning party—Democrats in 1974, Republicans in 1994—win about half the districts they seriously contest, while the losing party wins about 10 percent of those they seriously contest (since the Republicans seem to be seriously contesting only five seats, this would give them at best one offsetting gain). If you count all these 45 Republican seats as seriously contested, this would mean that Democrats would gain only 36 percent of them. A ’wave’ result, which some are forecasting, would give Democrats a net gain of 22 or 23 seats, enough for a 225-210 or 226-209 majority."
The problem with Barone is that he has an obvious bias. He also says: "I will readily concede that many smart observers would put many of these races in different columns."
On the other hand, people like Charlie Cook, Sabato, and the betting people are primarily interested in getting it right and aren’t painting such an optimistic outcome.
Democrats claim that although they are critical of President Bush, they support our troops in Iraq. But they are liars. Our troops are volunteers who believe in their mission, and have great respect for their Commander-in-chief, whom they overwhelmingly voted for in the last Presidential election.
Cowardly Democrats won’t go to Iraq and speak-out against our President because they know they would be booed off our military bases. They also believe people have the “right to kill” millions of unborn human beings through abortions, yet they consider themselves “good” people. I voted for John Kennedy, and would have voted for Bobby Kennedy, but after these great leaders, a moral sickness darkened the soul of the Democratic Party.
VINCENT BEMOWSKI - Veteran, U.S. Army
Menasha, WI