Karl Rove had lunch with reporters and editors with the Washington Times and predicted the GOP will prevail in November:
"I'm confident we're going to keep the Senate; I'm confident we're going to keep the House. The Foley matter has impact in some limited districts, but the research we have shows that people are differentiating between a vote for their congressman and a member from Florida," Mr. Rove said, referring to the Republican who resigned last month after his sexually explicit online messages to former congressional pages were discovered.
President Bush has begun to paint this year's election as a choice between strength and weakness on national security -- and the stark differences will show Americans the true nature of Democrats, Mr. Rove said.
"It is useful to remind people what [Democrats] said and what they do. I think they have given us here, especially in the last couple of weeks, a potent set of votes to talk about. You had 90 percent of House Democrats voting against the terrorist-surveillance program, nearly three-quarters of Senate Democrats and 80 percent of House Democrats voting against the terrorist-interrogation act. Something is fundamentally flawed."
In the hourlong interview, Mr. Rove was upbeat, telling stories from the campaign trail and joking about skewed political coverage that disproportionately shows Democrats poised to take control of Congress
Mr. Rove's optimism is not shared by pollsters, many of whom predict a Republican loss in the House -- with some saying the party could lose as many as 40 seats. The mood in the White House has shifted in recent days, with some beginning to concede the threat to the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, which they won in 1994.[snip]
Although Mr. Rove had previously predicted a loss of eight to 10 House seats, he said he remains confident that Republicans will not lose more than 15 -- the magic number that would flip control of the chamber to Democrats.
Democrats have to pick up six seats to gain control of the Senate -- virtually impossible, Mr. Rove said.
Expect outrage from the left side of the MSM. Doesn't Rove know he's supposed to lie down and admit defeat?
National Review has a symposium with analysis from Ed Gillespie, Dick Morris, Lisa Schiffren and others on whether the GOP can win in November.
Rich Lowry quotes from yesterday's White House bulletin which says pollsters are weighting their polls more toward Democrats, believing that more people are calling themselves Democrats:
In short, between 1992 and 2004, only once did one party enjoy an advantage as large as 4 points over the other in party ID. But in recent polling samples used by eight different polling organizations (USA Today/Gallup, CBS/NYTimes, ABC/Washington Post, CNN/Opinion Research, Newsweek, AP/Ipsos, Pew, and Time), the Democratic advantage in the sample surveyed was never less than 5 points. All these organizations conducted surveys in early October. According to Winston, the Democrats held the following party ID advantages in these early-October surveys:
* USAToday/Gallup: 9 points.
* CBS/NYT: 5 points
* ABC/WP: 8 points
* CNN: did not provide sample party ID details.
* Newsweek: 11 points.
* AP/Ipsos: 8 points.
* Pew: 7 points.
* Time: 8 points.
More reason to take polls with a grain of salt.
Also see Lorie's post from earlier this morning.
Update: Martin Lewis writing at the Huffington Post says this:
Let us make no mistake - Rove has not ceded this election yet.
"Yet"? You actually think Rove will surrender to the Democrats? Ever? Think again, Lewis.
Update II: Miguel A. Guanipa writing at The American Thinker is also upbeat about the GOP in November because the Democrats are simply, well, Democrats:
There is nevertheless, a poignant irony to the story that Democrats have had to resort to, raising doubts about the integrity of their opponents by highlighting one of the worst cases of Republican dereliction of duty and moral bankruptcy; after all, this common deficiency in Democrat circles has seldom proven detrimental to their own party in years past. This incessant pounding on Republicans by the media and Democrats with the Mark Foley hammer seems to have produced three unintended results.
1. It has desensitized many exasperated Republicans to the point that they are no longer listening.2. It has further angered some of the undecided voters by defining the Democrats as complete hypocrites who condemn unethical behavior only when it is politically expedient.
3. It has failed to significantly move the Republican base, which views the scandal as the transgression of one individual rather than a sign of the moral decay of a sizeable portion of the legislative branch of government.
Not exactly what Democrats had hoped for.
Here's more:
On another front, Democrats are trying desperately to appear strong on defense, since they perceive this as the President's weakness given the present discontent with the war in Iraq. But they miscalculate if they count on this discontent to translate into a sudden shift in priorities for the American electorate, who more than likely do not see this present frustration as sufficient enough reason to allow the devil they don't know to take the reins of both houses of Congress during wartime.
In the end Democrats will not be able to take Congress, primarily because they have not been able to convey the image of invincibility.
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Politics
Comments (16)
It's stories like this that... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Vegas Vic | October 18, 2006 9:47 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
It's stories like this that make me proud to be a conservative. I cant wait to see the Moonbats flying out the windows at the NYT on this one!!
Rock the World-- Vote Conservative in 2008!!
1. Posted by Vegas Vic | October 18, 2006 9:47 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 09:47
2. Posted by Tim in PA | October 18, 2006 9:47 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Party ID numbers may or may not be helpful. I recall in 2004 that my professors were trying to make sure everyone got out and voted. Of course, everyone said they would. In one class, on that Tuesday, more than half the class wore anti-bush shirts ("Bushit!", "There is a town in Texas missing an ass", etc).
When the class next met, however, the prof asked for a show of hands for "who is happy with how it turned out?" The four of us who voted for Bush knew who we were, and were not stupid enough to raise out hands. The rest of the class, however, then answered to "who isn't happy with it?".
Then, the prof asked who voted. Seven hands went up - coming out to 4 votes for Bush, and 3 for Kerry. More than twenty other (Democrat) students grumbled excuses about how they couldn't make it to the polls. I don't know if it was laziness or overconfidence.
2. Posted by Tim in PA | October 18, 2006 9:47 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 09:47
3. Posted by Lee | October 18, 2006 10:01 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If we live in such prosperoius times, why won't the Republicans increase the minimum wage?
Social Security increases this next year will average $33 a month - while health care costs and prescription costs continue to rise. Why arent the Republicans concerned with those issues?
Perhaps it's because those retired and on minimum wage just can't afford the high-priced lobbyists it takes to get legislation passed in a Republican-controlled Congress.
It's time for a change.
3. Posted by Lee | October 18, 2006 10:01 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 10:01
4. Posted by P. Bunyan | October 18, 2006 10:15 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Lee: "If we live in such prosperoius times, why won't the Republicans increase the minimum wage"
Because in non-communist countries wages are set by supply and demand not by the government. The only thing the minimum wage does is make a segement of the population unemployable.
Lee: "Social Security increases this next year will average $33 a month - while health care costs and prescription costs continue to rise. Why arent the Republicans concerned with those issues?"
Um, the Republicans want to fix Social Security, but the "democrats" are blocking them. Remember the "democrats" giving themselves a standing ovation at the State of the Union Adress for their success at perpetuating the problem?
Lee's final paragraph is too myopic and retarded to be worth comenting on...
4. Posted by P. Bunyan | October 18, 2006 10:15 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 10:15
5. Posted by Rory | October 18, 2006 10:18 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Lee........come on now little fella yesterday you were crying about.....
.
.
.
Wait for it .....
.
.
.
THE DEFECIT
Now by what miracle of Liberal Illogic is YOUR party going to do about your listed concerns?
If we live in such prosperoius times, why won't the Republicans increase the minimum wage? Social Security increases this next year will average $33 a month - while health care costs and prescription costs continue to rise.
5. Posted by Rory | October 18, 2006 10:18 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 10:18
6. Posted by Rory | October 18, 2006 10:26 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Here's a little pointer Lee-minimum wage can be regulated by the states-
Here's a map for ya -MAP
6. Posted by Rory | October 18, 2006 10:26 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 10:26
7. Posted by Lurking Observer | October 18, 2006 10:37 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Rory:
It would be interesting to compare the minimum wage map you provide with your link and job growth/unemployment figures.
I'd suspect that, with the exception of FL, job growth and higher minimum wage laws are at best unlinked, and at worst, inversely related. But that's a guess.
7. Posted by Lurking Observer | October 18, 2006 10:37 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 10:37
8. Posted by Rory | October 18, 2006 10:53 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Lurking Observer-
Well tell you what looking at Kaleeeefornia, and Washington state there might be a correlation between that and a stagnation of job growth, high taxes and an exodus of those Pacific Coasters towards me!
Gad I hope they at least learn and don't bring their quasi-commie ways with them.
Cripes even China is into Capitalism...
8. Posted by Rory | October 18, 2006 10:53 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 10:53
9. Posted by Lurking Observer | October 18, 2006 11:13 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Rory:
Too late! My understanding is that these folks regularly migrate to OR and WA. Then, once they're there:
1. They try to limit the number of additional Californians coming; while
2. Trying to turn their towns back into California (excessive regulation, higher taxes, etc.)
Parts of NH have seen the same thing, courtesy of folks from MA.
What is startling is the number of folks who still argue that one can tax their way to prosperity. Although I suspect I'd prefer them, to the ones who've concluded that higher taxes are just plain good, and if it strangles economic growth, so be it.
9. Posted by Lurking Observer | October 18, 2006 11:13 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 11:13
10. Posted by Not Tony | October 18, 2006 11:59 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I can't believe MARTIN freking LEWIS is being quoted by anyone, ever. The only worthwhile thing he's ever done is get The Rutles a recording contract.
10. Posted by Not Tony | October 18, 2006 11:59 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 11:59
11. Posted by Lori from Texas | October 18, 2006 12:54 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Is it possible that another unintended consequence of all the doom and gloom is that dismayed conservative voters were allowed to purge their disgust with their party, draw their line in the sand (that they would not vote for an R), and then take a step back from the line and see more clearly what that line will wrought. In other words, they have seen the devil face to face and decided to repent (meaning to turn) and come home.
Kind of like a dress rehearsal for election day where you still have time to adjust and not make a frightening and unforseen mistake.
Only Rovie could have masterminded this plot to wake up the base!
11. Posted by Lori from Texas | October 18, 2006 12:54 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 12:54
12. Posted by Dave | October 18, 2006 4:49 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I was glad to see that info come out on the polls to give more evidence about what I keep telling people. The polls are majorly flawed and should not be taken seriously.
12. Posted by Dave | October 18, 2006 4:49 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 16:49
13. Posted by Timothy | October 18, 2006 5:53 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If the Donkeys have both houses in the bag, then why do the Donkeys need a $10 million dollar loan?
13. Posted by Timothy | October 18, 2006 5:53 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2006 17:53
14. Posted by 914 Jesus is LORD | October 19, 2006 1:24 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
'Rove predicts GOP holds both House and Senate"
And libs will scream bloody murder rolling around on the floor looking for their pacifiers..AKA terrorists..
14. Posted by 914 Jesus is LORD | October 19, 2006 1:24 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 19, 2006 01:24
15. Posted by _Mike_ | October 19, 2006 10:24 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
15. Posted by _Mike_ | October 19, 2006 10:24 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 19, 2006 10:24
16. Posted by justice58 | October 19, 2006 7:48 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Listen
If you think that the Democrats will NOT take control of both houses, then you are more delusional than I previously thought.
The American people are NOT joking....We want change! And it will be a landmark landslide sweep!
Did I make myself clear??
16. Posted by justice58 | October 19, 2006 7:48 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 19, 2006 19:48