Political Fallout from Foley

There was a democratic strategist on MSNBC this morning who said that he fervently hopes that Hastert continues to hang on as speaker.

Boehner won't be able to get Hastert's job if the Republicans lose control of the House.

Are you implying that the republicans would eat their own? Say it ain't so. . .

Fred, BOehNER is either not bright enough to realize that...or, he's scheming for Nancy Pelosi's job as minority leader- like it's better to be the captain of a sinking ship than first mate on one afloat. He's also, regrettably, my representative- and a friend of my parents. Which just goes to show that bad taste isn't genetic.

"Stay the course", Denny. To quit would be to "cut and run".

House Republican candidates will suffer massive losses if House Speaker Dennis Hastert remains speaker until Election Day, according to internal polling data from a prominent GOP pollster, FOX News has learned.

How can this be, since Fox News has been claiming Foley as a Democrat?

Newsweek now has the Republicans trailing in every national issue voters regard as important, even the war of terror. How the mighty have fallen.

While I would love to see it happen, historically voters have re-elected their members of Congress by a massive margin (90% over the last 15-20 years, 95% over the last 5-10). The mentality is basically "Congress is corrupt and evil, but my guy isn't one of "them," he/she is a good guy."

The Democrats need to take 15 seats to regain control of the House ... 12 of the top 40 most vulnerable seats are open, but all of them are in Republican districts. 5 of the remaining 28 seats considered vulnerable are Democrats, so basically 35 of the 40 most vulnerable seats in Congress are either held or formerly held by Republicans. I can see the Democrats taking 10 to perhaps 15, but much more than that would be a truly significant shift.

In the Senate, I think the Democrats will fall short of the 6 they need, primarily because only 10 Republican seats are up for re-election this cycle. I

Of course, if anything that Fox News report seems TOO extreme, perhaps leading one to suspect the possibility that Fox News is exaggerating the situation for the Republicans, either to increase pressure for Hastert to quit or to scare the base into voting Republican despite any misgivings the Foley scandal has given them.

Still, regardless of questions about how to measure how big the problem is, it does appear the problem all this is creating for the Republicans is very real. I found this particularly interesting:

A nationwide poll of 1,500 registered voters released yesterday by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found that 57 percent of white evangelicals are inclined to vote for Republican congressional candidates in the midterm elections, a 21-point drop in support among this critical part of the GOP base.

Even before the Foley scandal, the portion of white evangelicals with a "favorable" impression of the Republican Party had fallen sharply this year, from 63 percent to 54 percent, according to Pew polls.

In the latest survey, taken in the last 10 days of September and the first four days of October, the percentage of evangelicals who think that Republicans govern "in a more honest and ethical way" than Democrats has plunged to 42 percent, from 55 percent at the start of the year.

Are you implying that the republicans would eat their own? Say it ain't so. . .

sarcasm aside, there was an interesting article examining the cannibalistic nature of the "gingrich revolution" i was reminded of when you said that:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/08/the_revolution_eats…