THE NEWS BLOG

 
Steve and Jen bring you this daily review of the news
Premium Advertiser

News Blog Sponsors

News Links

BBC World Service
The Guardian
Independent
Washington Post
Newsday
Iraq Order of Battle
Agonist
NY Times
LA Times
ABC News
CNN
Blogger

 
Blogs We Like

Daily Kos
Atrios
Digby's Blog
Skippy
Operation Yellow Elephant
Iraq Casualty Count
Uggabugga
Media Matters
Talking Points
Defense Tech
Intel Dump
Soldiers for the Truth
Margaret Cho
Juan Cole
Tbogg
Corrente
Gropinator
Just a Bump in the Beltway
Baghdad Burning
Wonkette
Howard Stern
Michael Moore
James Wolcott
Cooking for Engineers
There is No Crisis
Whiskey Bar
Rude Pundit
Driftglass
At-Largely
Crooks and Liars
Amazin' Avenue
DC Media Girl
The Server Logs

 
Blogger Credits

Powered by Blogger

Archives by
Publication Date
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
Comments Credits
Comments by YACCS
Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Clueless? Nah.


Stuart Rothenberg flashback
by kos

I'd forgotten about this Stu Rothenberg column from early January 2005:

Blogger Chris Bowers at MyDD perhaps is the best example of how clueless some bloggers really are about politics.

Last summer, he penned a piece, "DCCC Not Aggressive Enough," in which he complained about his party's House campaign committee. Now, in a two-part series called "Taking Back the House," he insists "we need to attack everywhere."

"I want 80 serious challenges to GOP House incumbents every two years and a Democratic name on the ballot in all 435 districts," he demands. "I have had enough of just targeting the twenty or so top races - let's engage in a full-frontal assault. ... The first step is to identify eighty Republicans against who we could mount a serious challenge."

It is undeniably true that you can't defeat an incumbent if you don't run someone against him. So, yes, it's better for a party to field candidates in 435 districts, if possible.

But some Republicans didn't have Democratic opponents because they were unbeatable, and no Democrat wanted to waste his or her time (to say nothing about money) by running. You can't make a race competitive simply by putting a name on the ballot, and the Democrats would not hold even a single additional seat had they put a name on the ballot in every district during the past two cycles.

Ha ha, that Chris Bowers. What a moron! That's what happens when amateurs try to meddle in work best left to the adults, those DC-based pros. So cute! So adorably naive! You can picture the good chuckle those elites had at Bowers' expense.

But man, doesn't that Rothenberg column look and sound idiotic nowadays? I assume Stu knows better now. Because according to Stu and about 99 percent of the party establishment at the time, it was ridiculous for for us to run candidates in places like WA-05, CA-11, CA-04, CO-05, ID-01, NE-01, NE-02, NE-03, WY-AL, PA-10, NY-19, NY-22, FL-16, OH-02 (twice!), and OH-18, to name just a few (and there's many more races like those).

Remember, you can't make a race competitive simply by putting a name on the ballot. Some Republicans have no opponents simply because they are unbeatable. And no one wants to waste his or her time (not to mention money) by running. Right?

We've sure come a long way. And if there's any doubt that our "expand the playing field" strategy is working, all we need to do is look to ID-01, where the GOP has been forced to spend half a million dollars defending one of those seats that establishment DC dictated could not, would not, ever, ever, ever become competitive. A district that Bush won with 69 percent of the vote.

The not-so-clueless Bowers has more.

And one final Rothenberg goodie:

As for Bowers' assertion that he wants "80 serious challenges" to GOP incumbents next year, he might as well ask for 120 or 150. I want vacation houses in Napa Valley and Palm Beach, and I'd like to be 35 years old again. "If wishes were horses, beggars might ride," as the English proverb puts it.

Well, according to Rothenberg's own count, we're up to 52 competitive races. The DCCC has identified 67 Democratic challengers in competitive races (Red to Blue and Emerging Races). More races are being added to those lists almost daily.

And note, those aren't "serious challenges". Those candidates DCCC and Rothenberg lists are just the ones in competitive races. If the standard is "serious challengers", that is, credible candidates, then we've got many, many more. More than 80 for sure.

Update: Fran for Dean makes an excellent point in the comments:

No one could have predicted that Democrats would be competitive if they challenged Republicans!



Yeah, right.

One point I want to make is this: the people who are running now are a lot different than people who ran in other cycles. They don't like what Bush is doing and in many cases, the DC crowd didn't do dick to help them get off the ground.

posted by Steve @ 3:04:00 AM

3:04:00 AM

The News Blog home page





 

Editorial Staff
RSS-XML Feeds

Add to My AOL

Support The News Blog

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More
News Blog Food Blog
Visit the News Blog Food Blog
The News Blog Shops
 
 
 
Operation Yellow Elephant
Enlist, Young Republicans