Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

At YearlyKos: Dems Set to Expand Congressional Majorities

CHICAGO -- Renowned Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg had some advice for the progressive bloggers gathered here for the second annual YearlyKos convention: Think big.

As in, big gains for Democrats in both the House and the Senate in 2008. "Do not think conservatively," said Greenberg during a panel discussion on the impact of Iraq on polling and the coming election. "The idea of a 50-seat-plus majority is real."

Greenberg wasn't the only Democratic strategist predicting huge gains. Tom Mattzie, Washington director of, insisted that a path existed to a 60-seat majority in the Senate after the 2008 election.

Why the rosy predictions?

Because the 2006 election in which Democrats regained majorities in the House and Senate was a "small point along the way," according to Greenberg, and the data continues to suggest that the political environment is worsening almost daily for Republicans.

As evidence, Greenberg cited two recent surveys he conducted. The first looked at the political environment in seven states -- Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Virginia -- where Senate Republican incumbents are up for reelection next year, while the second examined 70 potentially competitive House races.

In the seven Senate seats, the average reelect number for the GOP incumbents was 37 percent, with just 13 percent saying they would "definitely" vote to reelect the incumbent. Greenberg referred to those results as "go get your shotgun numbers."

Asked whether they would support the Republican incumbent or the Democratic challenger, 45 percent on average of the survey respondents chose the Democrat, while 44 percent backed the incumbent. (A caveat: In only one race -- Maine -- was the name of the Democratic challenger included. Given the national political environment, it's not terribly surprising that voters would choose a generic candidate over a specific Republican incumbent. While the political atmospherics are certain to set the background on which the races will play out, they are ultimately about the two candidates and their strengths and weaknesses.)

There's no doubt that these sunny views will make a few strategists back in Washington cringe as they seek to keep expectations under control -- especially more than a year before the actual election.

But the willingness of respected analysts within the party to go on the record about the possibility of major gains in 2008 shows just how optimistic many Democrats are heading into 2008.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 3, 2007; 4:10 PM ET
Categories:  House , Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama's HQ
Next: Barack Obama: Cultural Phenomenon


I've been a Kossack since Nov. 2003. I'm proud of that, and the impact our little site has had on politics in America. But I'd like to make two points. From the beginning we were feeling our way about how a community such as ours has an impact. Further, we were doing that while the technology we were attempting to apply was evolving in way we could never expect.

Just one example, in early 2004, we were brainstorming about how great it would be if we could capture the words of hypocritical politicians and show them being spoken to the voters in their Districts. We couldn't - no streaming video and most people had dial-up modems. But by 2006, we showed the real George Allen to his constituents and they replaced him with Jim Webb. I think that was a substantial improvement for the country, and so would any unbiased thinker.

In late 2005, dKos had extensive discussions about whether it was sound strategy to challenge incumbent Dems in party primaries. We selected a few, Liebermen among them, and we demonstrated the power of the netroots. GOPers think we lost that battle because Lamont wasn't elected, but we won a victory that energized the grassroots all over the country.

We're learning how to win, and with the addition of YouTube, we are going to cream the GOP in 2008. While the mainstream media propagandizes that the "Dems caved" on FISA, we at dKos know that only 41 Dems voted for the bill. And before the ink was dry, more than 1,000,000 Dem activists knew who they were, and planning has already begun on deciding which of them is going to face a serious challenge in next year's primaries.

I could go on and on, but I think you get the drift. We're not loonies. We're the democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Louis Martin | August 6, 2007 2:52 PM | Report abuse

How Republican bloggers fight Democratic bloggers:
"Hillary Clinton is a dirtbag."

What this article is actually about:
"Every single statistic out there shows that Republicans are TOAST in 2008."

The name-calling isn't going to work anymore, Loyal Bushies!
The problem is, you've proven to all of us that you don't know how to GOVERN!!

Are we better off now than we were eight years ago?
(hint: All the STATISTICS say NO)

Posted by: Jan | August 6, 2007 11:57 AM | Report abuse

let's just compleatly remove all non-gop voices from not only the media but the web. How would yo like that? Very much right?

This is america. You can't remove or silence (true) voices you don't agree with. In america it's about the many uniting as one. My problem witht he gop is you only united with gop'ers. You HATE all non-gop'ers. That is not what this country is about. I woudl gladly embrace you and bring you into the fold. But you have to release you hate of the other side. You have to compromise. You cannot silence anyone you disagree with. You cannot have everythhing you want. THAT IS THE MENTALITY OF A CHILD. Like th e r's walking out of the vote on friday. Like newt shutting the gov. down. If you don't get your way, you take your ball and go home. That is not what this country is about. You have choose party over country. That is treason.

Posted by: rufus | August 4, 2007 8:28 PM | Report abuse

To the fascists above who say I am ruining the world, I will say this.

Who have I tried to silence? Who have I removed from this site. Nobody. I mearly call you on your propoganda and lies. And you want me removed for that? Who is hurting the first amendment? Me?

Facsist hypocrite gop'ers. It's so ingrained in your make-up and party you don't even knwo your doing it. I used to balme fox and rush for lying and propogating to you people. Now it is known what they are. Look in the mirror

Posted by: rufus | August 4, 2007 8:24 PM | Report abuse

"Why is Kos a "hate site"? I can't fathom why these people attack such a group."

Bill O'REilly constantly even calls media matters a hate site.

Check it out yourself. Any non-gop parrot site is a hate site to these people. The fascis gop is so ingrained in their fascism they cannot even see it. But I am curbing free speech, as said above. It's me. a anonymous poster. It can't be Bill O/Hannity/Rush removing any non-gop voices. I am the problem. They say that, then think it'[s going to stop me HAHAHHAHA.

You don't like go elsewhere you fascist cowards.

I just watched o'reilly and his minions attle obama relentlessly. This is the next presidnet and they're treating him like a window washer.

YOu have all media GOP. You cannot have the internet. I knwo the patriot act is meant to silence the internet. You haven't won yet. Go Koz.

Posted by: rufus | August 4, 2007 8:20 PM | Report abuse

NonP: Welcome, I find your comments to be well thought out and make a lot of sense. I will also add, it is good to see folks have differing opinions and be able to discuss them. Feel free to ask anything, and I can assure you one of the regulars will respond.

Posted by: lylepink | August 4, 2007 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Mark in Austin--"Physics question for MikeB: does the conservation of energy dictate that the wind energy expended on turning the blades reduces the potential energy in the atmosphere downwind from each generator? Does lining up windmills reduce the efficiency of subsequent generators?"

If you will allow my layman's take, the short answer is "yes" and the long answer is "yes, but the effect is fairly small by itself and at the current scale." Non-locally winds are awfully strong even though localised events might occur.

On the other hand, producing energy this way will reduce production somewhere else which has its own effect--such as not releasing a quantity of steam into the air from a nuclear plant to heat it up. That could, theoretically, lead to wind shifts which are caused by pressure differentials or temperature differentials in the air along with of course the suction effect of an already-existing wind channel.

We do not really know what the exact effects of, say, a huge solar farm in Death Valley or an equally large wind farm somewhere on the Great Plains. They will absolutely remove some energy (likely converted to heat) and obviously transfer some energy (what solar panels convert will not be reflected back into the atmosphere either) which could, conceivably, affect or alter even the currently stable and predictable great wind currents which would then affect the oceans and so on. Tidal power might have its own effects.

Not to sound too negative, any such changes would not be catastrophic nearly on the magnitude that the current means of energy production from fossil fuels are and will be.

Posted by: roo | August 4, 2007 1:44 PM | Report abuse

P luv - It may be for the self-assumed importance that so many of the netroots give to themselves. That turns people off. Remember how "they" had Ned Lamont elected. Turns out that they could have not been more wrong. And they tend to ignore that huge failure.

Until they have a track record and can show that they have actual influence on an election, it's just an exercise in ego.

On the other side The Club for Growth is somewhat of a joke for the same reason. Except they're more organized and have specific goals.

In the Club for Growth case, it's an exercise in throwing money down the drain. Not very practical for fiscal conservatives when you think about it.

But, the average person likes the egotist even less than the spendthrift.

Both elements have chances to prove themselves in the future, but they're still at the level of self-promoters right now.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 4, 2007 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Why is Kos a "hate site"? I can't fathom why these people attack such a group. It is a left group but I have been reading it for years and I don't see it hatefully attacking any group. They go after bush for obvious reasons but they don't call for any harm to come to him or any republican. But that idiot O'Reilly said that if Al Quida wanted to hit San Fran then do it. He would not help pay for reconstruction.

Can't people wake up to the hate he spews on a daily basis.

Posted by: P Luv | August 4, 2007 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Chris: This topic should be the subject of a future thread.;_ylt=AlhootaJsUv_P_Y8NkIzh4Cs0NUE

Calif. Tightens Voting Machine Standards
By STEVE LAWRENCE, Associated Press Writer

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - California's top elections official placed rigorous security conditions on voting equipment used in dozens of counties and limited the use of two of the most widely used machines statewide.

Secretary of State Debra Bowen announced the measures minutes before midnight Friday, making good on a promise to tell counties at least six months before California's Feb. 5 presidential primary if their voting equipment would be decertified.

The announcement leaves the most affected counties with little time to find alternate equipment in time for the primary. The decision follows an eight-week security review of voting systems used in all but a few of California's 58 counties.

University of California computer experts found that voting machines sold by three companies -- Diebold Election Systems, Hart InterCivic and Sequoia Voting Systems -- were vulnerable to hackers and that voting results could be altered.

Bowen said she had decertified the machines, then recertified them on the condition they meet her new security standards. She also limited the Diebold and Sequoia machines to one per polling place. That will force some counties to find replacement equipment on a tight schedule.

Bowen ordered the review, which was released last week, to ensure California would not face the same doubts about the accuracy of its voting systems that hit Florida after the 2000 election and Ohio in 2004.

The additional requirements she imposed included banning all modem or wireless connections to the machines to prevent them from being linked to an outside computer or the Internet. She also required a full manual count of all votes cast on Diebold or Sequoia machines to ensure accuracy.

Bowen said the study revealed some vulnerabilities that would allow hackers to manipulate the systems "with little chance of detection and with dire consequences."...

Posted by: NonP | August 4, 2007 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Mark -- an observation for you. Obviously undocumented aliens and illegal immigration are a hot topic in the Border areas, and every once in a while also in a small town where some "protective" law is passed. But, I sense that it may have reached a high water mark with the rejection of the President's plan. I'm not sure that the rest of the country thinks it is a critical as the Southwest.

Philosophically yes; but practically, no. We've lived with this particular scenario for over 20 years, the Republic hasn't fallen and the "throw them out" crowd rejected a legitimate attempt at trying to begin some type of control.

Immigration shouldn't be like abortion where diametrically opposed philosophies cannot practically be reconciled. Both sides can work at reasonable solutions. But, the "anti" crowd treats it as another All or Nothing issue. As I said, I don't think the rest of the country sees it that way, and the Anti's may have shot themselves in the foot.

Posted by: NonP | August 4, 2007 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Sceptic in CA, this hasn't been a particularly good time for this blog, with two trolls treating it as if it was a sandbox and they were Kindergarten King.

It's best when there are election campaigns underway and only a few months to go to the election. Even then though it is still a place where there are sharply divided philosophies, but at least the apparent and real campaign issues are discussed then; not the cost of haircuts or whether a candidate's suit is fashionable or not.

There are a lot of posters who I think are not contributing right now because the campaigns don't really mean anything. Hopefully they'll be back.

My fear is that the rufuses will drive away even more legitimate posters. Then the rufuses and Zouks will have done what the Terrorists couldn't do, destroy Free Speech.

As drindl said, take a look back at times. We'll leave the light on.

Posted by: NonP | August 4, 2007 11:02 AM | Report abuse

O'Falafel is a big fat liar and always has been. Every one knows that except the brain dead people who watch his show.
Unfortunately he is not the only person in the "media" who is confused about dkos. The site is not all liberals. There are a lot of centrists there and everything in between. We even have some libertarians and republicans. And here is another shocking fact...MOST OF AMERICA AGREES WITH US ON THE MAIN ISSUES OF THE DAY! We are the mainstream folks. It is the right wing which is radical and out of touch. It is the radical right 25 percent who still support this immoral war and Bush with his crazy far right policies. The other 75 percent of americans.
Sure there are people who post silly nonsense and ugly comments, but they get troll rated and their comments get hidden. Eventually the community bans them. Then there are others who are third party extremists who are barely tolerated, when they argue their Naderite purity nonsense, but they are the minority and this is America, they get a voice too. But mostly Kos is just your average democratic forum full of all sorts of average democrats talking politics and organizing to take back more seats in congress.

Posted by: Kos Member | August 4, 2007 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Sorry to hear you're leaving, Skeptic -- but politics is a rough and tumble business, never more so than now. If you don't fight back you crushed --dems have leaarned this the hard way.

I agree mark that the gavel call was wrong, there seems to have been a great deal of confusion. No one ever wrote on this blog about the kind of procedural shenanigens that occurred while the r's were in power though -- did those not bother you?

What you say about the undocs is true -- they tend to be poor people who haven't had much health care--denying them medical care is self-defeating. People in this country seem to have forgotten about epidemics. All it will take is one bad one to bring it all back. I don't think they realize that's possible.

We had another unusually heavy downpours last night here in Westchester County NY-- the basement flooded again -- 3rd time this summer. Only an inch -- but the floor is badly eroded now. It's never flooded like this before this summer. Last summer we had our first recorded tornado, and this summer more. Huge swathes of trees down -- including a beautiful 500-year old hemlock forest, hundreds of trees, in one of our county parks.

The intensity of the storms is now quite scary at time. I used to enjoy thunderstorms but now you just don't know what's going to happen.

Posted by: drindl | August 4, 2007 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Before I go about my day, I want to throw out a thought about undocs.

Until we reduce their presence to a practicable minimum (a valid goal for a sovereign nation, however difficult it may prove), and even thereafter, we will have to recognize that they provide vectors for communicable disease.

There is some level of including them in the health care system that we should tolerate in order to monitor them, quarantine them, cure them; whatever it takes to reduce the health threat from them. Epidemic can be worse than fire. The Public Health Service(s) and the CDC are not giveaway programs. They are among our most proven and effective sources of national security.

The Ds were still dead wrong the other night, in not rectifying their quick gavel.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 4, 2007 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Skeptic, please look in from time-to-time.
All the Texas Exes who post have been reasonable folks :-) and I think there are more than a dozen others; conservatives, moderates, libertarians, and liberals, who care for the exchange of views.

One failing of this blog is that we who have adult lives can only sneak-a-peak, as if it were a guilty pleasure. We must scroll through the inane repetitions from a few who have seem to have nothing else to do but who want to call attention to themselves; like undisciplined children, they leave a mess.

You would not believe how green it is at Fort Stockton.

We will miss you.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 4, 2007 8:21 AM | Report abuse


You are a terrible writer and speller, and you sound like a 14-year-old.

Instead of disrupting the conversation here, you might focus your attention on this site:

Once you've mastered the skills taught there, you can come back. You might then be able to get someone to pay attention to what you are saying.

Posted by: rwc | August 4, 2007 7:13 AM | Report abuse

This site site sometimes feels like a waste of time. But randomly someone like skeptic donny or che come in and I know this time put in isn't a waste. Also maybe I can trun zouk and GOp one of these days. When they realize what time it is. Once they lose their hatred of me and start to understand I am not lying. I am not propogating. Once they finally get fed up of being a lawyer for the people that are ruining their country. Once they realize that there brothers are being killed unjustly, it might register. I can hope and pray for that day right. Until then I will take you abuse. It is nothing to me. Fort benning showed me that fear and pain don't exist. I stood toe to toe with the hardest men in the world, that wanted to kill me. How am I going to come back home and fear some pimple faced kid or old man. Fear doesn't exist.

Posted by: rufus | August 4, 2007 5:44 AM | Report abuse

Good luck skeptic. Independant thinker slike yo do not belong here. This site, as the internet is abttle ground. It's better to battle here than in reality.

I would say I didn't start this propoganda war agisnt the american people. I was brought in this battle by Bill O'REilly. The right wing propogandists started this war agsint teh american people, not the liberals. We must fight back. Imagine germeny in the 30's. If less peopel were passive and stood up against fascism the wold would be a differant place.

Good luck skeptic. I enjoyed your posts. I to feel often this site is a waste of time. But if I was to go to a liberal site I would be preaching to the converted. The liberals are not the ones osolating the country with divide and conquer. The lib's are holding up justice. So me speaking to them does no good. If I were to go on a conservatie site I would be attacked non-stop and the trolls would spend all day lying and discrediting. At least her eI have some support. A nuetral site like this is the only place for me. Good luck skeptic. I enjoyed you posts. God bless.

Posted by: rufus | August 4, 2007 3:37 AM | Report abuse

rufus - looks like you got thr Friday Line thread shut down. Way to go!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 4, 2007 1:58 AM | Report abuse

Mark in Austin, Judge (though you didn't post in this particular entry), DCAustinite, and a few others whose online names I can't remember -- I'm saying goodbye. I thought that going to a WaPO blog site would yield some intelligent discussions, but it's clear that spending time here is a waste of my time. But it's clear that most people are NOT interested in civil discourse -- no wonder the country is in the state it's in! I am amazed by the ignorance of so many (trolls?), the incoherent entries I've read, and the blatant anger that permeates these pages. Sad to say, I read it from people on both sides. Is it the Internet and its ability to give people the sense of anonymity so that they can spew their venom? Or is it just ignorance? In either case, it's not fun for someone like me who isn't married to any one position and wants to hear cogent arguments. But this, clearly, is no different than most blog sites from either site I've visited. The majority of you, perhaps by design, offer strictly partisan arguments -- and often, in an unintelligible way. I am therefore going back to simply reading the news -- from multiple sources so I can ferret out the truth. Reading the blogs and the comments is clearly a waste of my time.

Posted by: Skeptic in CA | August 4, 2007 1:09 AM | Report abuse

The Democrats have alienated so many moderates with their incompetence that they have to reach out to the left wing nut cases and illegals for votes.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 4, 2007 12:47 AM | Report abuse

On the 407 mi drive from Austin to Alpine this afternoon I listened to CSpan on my XM radio. I heard the notorious House vote several times over. The Ds were wrong, and the Rs were correct. It was confused enough that the initial fast gavel may have been a good faith mistake. Not immediately rectifying it made it an ugly power play. Apologies and a do-over are in order.

For the first time in my life, I think, the brush country from Ozona to Fort Stockton is green in August. It is raining where rain seldom falls.

And the mesas east of Fort Stockton are dotted with wind generators for miles and miles. It's quite a sight. Physics question for MikeB: does the conservation of energy dictate that the wind energy expended on turning the blades reduces the potential energy in the atmosphere downwind from each generator? Does lining up windmills reduce the efficiency of subsequent generators?

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 4, 2007 12:28 AM | Report abuse

". Bring the Fairness Doctrine back, something the new Democratic majority needs to be working on right now, to end this sort of dangerous nonsense."

Right. Did we have these propoganda prblems before regan got rid of the fairness doctrine in 1984? The next year after the fairness doctinre was eliminated by repub, just who busrt on the scene?

The comedian RUSH LIMBAUGH. After a prominant liberal was murdered my skin heads in sacremento (norhtern cali, my old stomping ground)

Posted by: rufus1133 | August 4, 2007 12:25 AM | Report abuse

This is the r mentallity. I seriuosly hear them say, "24 is the one of the hishest rated shows on tv. If that's not an endorsment of torute I don't knwo what is."


Are these people evil, deranged or just plain stupid?

Posted by: rufus | August 4, 2007 12:22 AM | Report abuse

The House dems looked about as stupid today as I have ever seen them, and that is saying a lot. The re-vote, whatever one wants to call it, goes to the pandering to ILLEGALS, and I, for one, cannot see how this can help them in any way. When protecting our borders is becoming so important to the lower wage earners, in that so many of their jobs are being taken and the illegals are paid under the table when they cannot be for obvious reasons. Something has to be done and soon.

Posted by: lylepink | August 4, 2007 12:20 AM | Report abuse

And, ann Poster Posted by: | August 3, 2007 11:59 PM, something else that ProudToBeGOP conveniently forgets is that very wealthy owners of those radio stations have spent millions of dollars to buy markets for people like Limbaugh and O'Reilly. o'Reilly lost money, may still be loosing money for all we know, in virtually every East Coast market. His shabby little show, however, was fully funded, loes and all. Furthemore, ownes of these right wing media twits commonly buy spots for them. The much vaunted "free market" garbage espoused by Proud and other right wing zealots is suspended when it comes to this sort of subsidized propaganda. The only other time in modern history I can find where this was done was by the industrialists, propping up Hilter and the Nazi Party in Germany when it appeared they were going to loose in 1932. All of this is merely another reason we ought to be very concerned about Mr. Murdock's purchase of the WSJ. It merely provides another outlet for the lies of the far right. Bring the Fairness Doctrine back, something the new Democratic majority needs to be working on right now, to end this sort of dangerous nonsense.

Posted by: MikeB | August 4, 2007 12:18 AM | Report abuse

proudtobeGOP--You must be joking.

"Tom Clancy gets more readers than Noam Chomsky."

You are seriously presenting this as an argument? Could not come up with a peer-respected conservative sociologist to compare against Chomsky? 'Cause I see your Tom Clancy and raise a Stephen King.

My argument is and has been that Republican voters like to be told what to do and think and therefore prefer one-directional communication.

Posted by: roo | August 4, 2007 12:15 AM | Report abuse

The inexplicably proudtobeGOP says "When Rush Limbaugh has more listeners than NPR, or Tom Clancy sells more books than Noam Chomsky, or Motor Trend gets more subscribers than Mother Jones, liberals want to convince us (or themselves, perhaps) that it's all because of some catastrophic market failure or a grand corporate conspiracy to dumb down the masses. In reality, it's just the result of consumer choice."

No in reality, it's the result of consumers being encouraged not to think or develop a mature and discriminating appreciation for whats available. When we are taught from birth to value action figures, cartoon explosions, plug in dolls which move, speak, and wet themselves with little need for input from the child, video baseball/football/basketball/etc., Big Macs, fake hair and even body parts if necessary, and just in general things that are fast, loud, flashy, and uncomplicated (albeit overpriced), it's no wonder that many Americans have neither the patience, nor the ability to appreciate what NPR, Chomsky, Mother Jones, Vonnegut, the BBC, Charlie Parker, Picasso, Bulgakov, Jean Parl Sartre, Stravinsky, John Cage, etc. etc. have to offer.

And that's a real shame, and does not speak well of American culture.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 3, 2007 11:59 PM | Report abuse

drindl writes "The R's ...can't silence the Internet. Not yet, anyway, although they are trying."

And as proof of this, she claims that fees will be charged by carriers of internet traffic---"i.e. corporations, telecoms, etc." based on usage furthemore, she adds that right-wing bloggers are mad about this also. Remind me again is this the R's trying to silence anyone?

If the R's are behind it ... Oh yeah, I's all part of the VRWC, which according to drindl and rufus, amounts to Bill O'Reilly arguing with libs on The Factor.

In fact, the US is working worldwide to prevent threats to free speech on the internet. U.S. efforts to promote the free flow of information range from monitoring Internet access in countries around the world and including the data in the annual State Department Country Reports on Human Rights to financing Internet projects in developing countries. Since 2004, the United States has given $250 million to projects that include assisting with Web site design, providing computers and training technicians to keep systems operating.

However, there is recent evidence of liberals like Pelosi and Reid or Kucinich trying to limit free speech here at home with the so-called Fairness Doctrine. When Rush Limbaugh has more listeners than NPR, or Tom Clancy sells more books than Noam Chomsky, or Motor Trend gets more subscribers than Mother Jones, liberals want to convince us (or themselves, perhaps) that it's all because of some catastrophic market failure or a grand corporate conspiracy to dumb down the masses. In reality, it's just the result of consumer choice.

And Suzanne, I and others are taking back the party and will never give up the fight, nor cease to be proud.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | August 3, 2007 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Seriously wouldn't you love to see a Democratic president with a veto proof Senate? Dayum.

Posted by: JGG | August 3, 2007 11:07 PM | Report abuse

I think it is a compelling study to consider. These republican seats are "in the mix" because the country feels a drift and the average worker is facing frightening problems like health care costs, declining wages, high gas prices. It's not just Iraq though that may coalesce the whole need for change.

2008 could be a watershed election.

Posted by: TW | August 3, 2007 9:58 PM | Report abuse

rufus, so what's your deal? Are you 12 yrs old? 14? Mentally challenged?

seriously, even 'your own side' thinks you are a snivelling little worm. Can't you go post somewhere where people would appreciate your whackjob viewpoints?

Posted by: The rest of the world | August 3, 2007 9:43 PM | Report abuse

I hear tha suzanne. Compromise. Personlly I think the r's refusal to compromise with destroy them for a generation. Not that I think the illegals getting insurance is good. But to walk out on the vote. Elementary school kids. They refuse to compromise on anything.

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't at all be proud to be GOP....until I reclaimed my party from those that have hijacked it.

Any extreme position knows how to do nothing but poison the rest. Whats wrong with being in the middle? I want my country back!!!!

Posted by: Suzanne | August 3, 2007 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Mike B, I totally agree, Hillary's cozying up to India will catch up with her.

Bsimon, I'll keep an open mind with Obama, but he hurt himself with me this week. I agree that a piece by CC about who attends the Yearly Kos get together would be interesting.

Right now I'm really mad at the Dem House leadership. There was a vote today on giving illegal aliens welfare... it was voted down by two votes, but the Dems ignored the vote and said it passed, and then managed to reopen the vote and somehow reverse the outcome.

The GOP (after loud booing unlike anything I have ever heard on the Hill) walked out in protest.

And, I don't blame them. This may be payback for the way they ran things for so many years, excluding the Dems, but the Dems acting the same way is just plain wrong. Plus, the majority of the electorate is against welfare for illegals.

Hello!... remember us, the ones who pay the bills and are being plunged into unsustainable debt due to your reckless spending and pandering.

Sign me disgusted....

Posted by: Truth Hunter | August 3, 2007 8:07 PM | Report abuse

You misread John. My goal is to bring O'Reilly down. I'm just posting his hypocricy. I can't figure out how o"reilly and Rush/hannity get to silence any and everybody they disagree with, but I can't get Fox "News" off the air. Do you get it? How long can these fascsits lie and propogate against teh elderly without recourse?

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Dodd a propagandist -- coming from an O'Reilly fan. Now that made me laugh.

Posted by: John | August 3, 2007 7:32 PM | Report abuse

If the gop doesn't have terrorism, what do they have?

"GOP loses its advantage on terrorism
By: Steve Benen @ 12:46 PM - PDT A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll (.pdf) includes most of the predictable numbers -- Bush is unpopular, Americans are uneasy about the economy, etc. -- but respondents were also asked which party they trusted more to handle various policy issues.

The Dems enjoy huge, double-digit advantages on every domestic issue, but when asked which party is more trustworthy on dealing with the "war on terrorism," it was the only question on which Americans were divided right down the middle -- 29% said Dems, 29% said Republicans, 20% said both, and 18% said neither.

In and of itself, that's not particularly surprising, but the trend is noteworthy. In October 2002, the GOP enjoyed a 36-point advantage on this question. But end of 2003, it had slipped to a 26-point lead. In early 2004, it slipped a few more points, and in late 2004, a few more still. By last fall, the Republicans led Dems on the question by 10 points, and now the GOP advantage has disappeared altogether.

How long, do you suppose, will the media continue to report that Republicans still enjoy far more public trust on terrorism than Dems?"

Posted by: rufsu | August 3, 2007 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Big tough O'Reilly. A God in his own mind. More power than a sitting senator. WOW.

Like the trolls on this site. The power they have is all in their head. Th eonly power they have is the power WE give them. The future will not be kind to the GOP. Absolute power corrupts absolutly. That is their excuse. zero accountability.

I hold those responsible accountable. Others do to. Dittoheads! YOu cannot hide in your caves forever

Read please. Fox Rush O'Reilly and hannity are the puppet master. The gop'ers are the slaves chained in the basement or cave. Help me set you free. I know it's bright outside at first. In time your eye's will agjust. It's been so long since they've seen real things. Since you were a child

Posted by: RUFUS | August 3, 2007 7:13 PM | Report abuse

"After airing the interview on the August 2 edition of The Radio Factor, O'Reilly said that Dodd "legitimizes what's going on there" and, citing his own comments about San Francisco, said Dodd "doesn't even know where I said it. He takes the propaganda that's handed to him -- I don't think he's ever seen The O'Reilly Factor." O'Reilly added, "I don't think he's ever even gone to the Kos." O'Reilly went on to ask co-host Lis Wiehl if she had visited Daily Kos and she answered, "I have. ... It's awful. It's awful every day." Pressed by O'Reilly to say whether Dodd "is lying" when he defends Daily Kos, Wiehl agreed: "In my view, yes, because it's just so horrible."

Later that day, O'Reilly re-aired the Dodd interview on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor. Afterward, he said that he is "always disappointed when people come on with propaganda like Senator Dodd did," and asserted that Dodd "obviously didn't know what I said about Al Qaeda in San Francisco." O'Reilly's then replayed his August 1 interview with comedian Dennis Miller, who said he was "a little disappointed" that O'Reilly "would give a hack like that a toe hold" by hosting him on his cable show, adding, "I must tell you as a viewer of the Factor, I don't need to hear from hacks like Chris Dodd." O'Reilly later declared that Dodd had gotten "smacked right back" and said, "I didn't like to do that to a sitting senator, I have to tell the audience. It does not give me pleasure, but I certainly have to do it."

Posted by: DODD A PROPOGANDIST? | August 3, 2007 7:08 PM | Report abuse

chrisfl - You think Hillary saved herself? Come one! The bloggers are the very people who have been loosing their jobs to outsourcing and H1-B indentured servants. Do you honestly think these people don't all know that Hillary is one of the dirtbags chiefly responsible for this? Her handlers wont be able to dodge all of the questions about this and I expect more than a few to trickle through and create some interesting moments as she dodges and weaves away from an honest answer. If not know, sometime during this campaign, Hillary Clinton is going to get nailed for her support for India over the U.S. and it's going to cost her dearly.

Posted by: MikeB | August 3, 2007 7:02 PM | Report abuse

"During the interview, O'Reilly demanded that Dodd repudiate Daily Kos and its YearlyKos convention, citing a "vile" cartoon about Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-CT) on the website. In response, Dodd noted that hundreds of thousands of people participate in the Daily Kos community and said: "My point is you are not being candid. Your objection is to this community gathering. You don't like their politics." When O'Reilly again said that the site was "vile," Dodd replied, "There are a lot of things that you say on a daily basis that I find vile, to be honest with you." Dodd said that "of course" he did not approve of the "cartoon," but added, "[T]hat's not the issue here," to which O'Reilly replied: "Of course it's the issue. That's what they do. That's what they do on the site. They do that hate stuff all the time." Dodd later said, "The fact that there are objectionable people who show up here on this site doesn't discredit everyone else who participates in this in a wonderful way to share their views on a variety of subjects." O'Reilly responded: "[Y]ou talk about being disingenuous. Your description of that site is so opposite from what it is and anyone who's been on it knows the hate that they peddle every day. ... You are so dead wrong on this and you ought [to] apologize to Lieberman."

Posted by: O'Reilly dodd | August 3, 2007 6:55 PM | Report abuse

No one else is going to post? Ok. don't mind if I do.

I got you proof, old man:

"O'Reilly repeated his false claim that he takes any objectionable "postings" off "right away." As Media Matters for America documented, several objectionable comments about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) remained on his site as of 1 p.m. ET on August 1, despite being highlighted by more than a week earlier.
When Dodd said that O'Reilly had previously "talk[ed] about Al Qaeda attacking San Francisco and blowing up San Francisco," O'Reilly did not deny saying it, but rather challenged Dodd to name "when" and in "what forum" he had made the comment. After Dodd said he believed it was in 2005 on O'Reilly's television show, O'Reilly responded, "No, you're wrong. I didn't say it here. You don't know what the hell I said, with all due respect." He went on to complain that Dodd "got it from Media Matters." In fact, as Media Matters noted, on the November 10, 2005, broadcast of The Radio Factor, O'Reilly, reacting to San Francisco's passage of a ballot measure urging public high schools and colleges to prohibit on-campus military recruiting, said that, if he were president, he would tell San Franciscans that "if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."
After Dodd mentioned an Indiana University study which found that, on average, O'Reilly engages in name-calling once every 6.8 seconds during the "Talking Points Memo" segment of his show, O'Reilly asserted that "we" had "discredited" the study -- although his producer's attempt to do so was thoroughly flawed, as Media Matters documented."

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 6:55 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats and liberals realized they needed a mobilizing force of their own but could not match Limbaugh's reach on the radio. Enter the Internet, and Markos Moulitsas."

aND HENCE. tHE REPUBLICANS ATTEPMT TO MINIMIZE AND SILENCE THE INTERNET and consolidate news to a few sources ie fox rush svage drudge hannity ingram malkin coulter. Did I leave anyone out. Look at those names people. Public enemies 1-8. Their goal is to silence all that is not gop parroting. ie o'reilly's attacks on the koz, o'reilly silencing twista and ludacris. Oreilly and hannity silencing rosie. "Democrats are terrorists" Whya re these peopel still on the air. How have they not gone the Imus route. I guess it's becasue they are propogandist and slaves to their oil people. You can't go after teh advertisers is they are big oil and defense contractors like boeing and lockheed. Oil is at a all-time high defense contractors flowing to gopers like hotcakes. Rush hannity and o'reilly getting high ratings. This is why they thought they were untouchable. Not if they are more people strongly agaisnt you than strongly for you. I think the more people that listen of watch these propogandsits the fast they will be off the air.

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 02:02 PM

Posted by: from a previous blog | August 3, 2007 6:52 PM | Report abuse

I guess CC blogging truth got the gop scared and they left. To bad.

"You can't handle the truth" :)

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 6:43 PM | Report abuse

"I like to think of the YearlyKos and similar Dem groups as the counterpart of the Republicans' Christian Coalition. Gotta have ALL voices heard, even if I don't always agree with every position. "

Very good point. i would add, where the democrats trying to silecne and shut down the "religous" right movement. They they try and pull all non-chiristin views out of the debate? No. That is the differance.

How many days now has O'Reilly attacked the koz. Three straight weeks non-stop. Just like everyone else he doesn't agree with. silence them .Why can't I silence him again? Fascsits.

do you hear me now people? "hello, bueeler, bueler." :)

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 6:33 PM | Report abuse

"Wow, is this the kind of crap you wrote on the lib website drindl? Care to provide any evidence of this so called attempt to silence the internet? What a bunch of b.s. that is. "

DRindl just did provide an example old man. O'Reilly and his minions are tryinmg to silence kos the same way they silenced rosie. The same why they handled ward churchill. That's what they do. Why do you think I'm on this site. Everywhere else gets threats and hate from the horde. What have I been telling you people for months now? What, you thought I was lying?

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 6:26 PM | Report abuse

"All day I've been tuning in to Hate Radio [ABC] off and on to hear the harpies attacking YeaarlyKos. All of them so far, one rightwing shriekfest after another including Hannity, Ingraham, and Limbaugh, have attacked it relentlessly, mindlessly, viciously. and o'Reilly the Perpetual Hater himself."

Right and it bleeds over here. I'm the bad devil. It comes from the avatars and their slaves follow orders. You believe me now drindl. Now do you think I have been telling the truth. I think your on point, by the way drindl

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Who's there? Care to do a piece on what kind of person would attend a 'YearlyKos' event?"

Again. Lies spin and misdirection. Anything to take off the topic at hand. Anything for the gop to discredit. A little angry simon lately. Trying to slap a label on someone to discredit everything they say. You knwo I'm used to that. You cannot silence freedom, you cannot silecne truth. You cannot destroy the constitution. I won't let you simon

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 6:22 PM | Report abuse

I strongly agree CC, for once. A huge gain for dems. Gop, a suggestion. Rather than wasting the next year attacking people, lying spinning and discrediting. Why not fix the problems you have caused the last 15 years?

Why not more to re-consolidate the coutry. You and the right-wing attack machine has spent so much time dividing us. The mor eyou can help to bring us back togther, unlike the repubs today who walked out when the vote wasn't going their way, the better your party will be for the future.

It looks like you are to invested in hate and lies though. I don't see it happening. I think the R's will be swept in all aspects. They will be eliminated from the political landscape for a generation. Stubborness caused this, not the dems. Stop the balem game. Take responsibility and work towards the future.

Posted by: rufus | August 3, 2007 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Dems rock. Repubs are terribly ignorant folk without a clue.

Posted by: yankee | August 3, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Let's face it -- those on the Internet, i.e., the bloggers on both sides -- aim to convert people to their point of view. Those who post comments generally frequent the blogs that mirror their views -- or as I recently learned on this blog do so to inflame. The DailyKos is no different. And yes, there are some posts and a lot of comments that are rather vile, so I generally stay away. Yet the DailyKos cannot be dismissed. That they are willing to attach faces to their online identities at an annual gathering and the attention that Hannity, O'Riley, Limbaugh, et. al, is giving them legitimizes the group's ability to effect elections.

Will Rogers, a Democrat, was once quoted as having said that he didn't belong to an organized party. To the Republicans' credit, until now, they were indeed more organized than the Republicans. The Dems' diversity of members, opinions, and positions has made them less effective in recent years vis a vis the Republicans. It's nice to see groups within the party finally coalescing and realizing that while they each have their favorites going into the primary season, I suspect they will back and work hard for the nominee just as they did for John Kerry and other Democrats across the country.

I like to think of the YearlyKos and similar Dem groups as the counterpart of the Republicans' Christian Coalition. Gotta have ALL voices heard, even if I don't always agree with every position.

Posted by: Skeptic in CA | August 3, 2007 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Hillary saved herself by agreeing to come to YearlyKos. YK is huge for the Dems. Amazing...

The lefy anger would have been brutal. Come to think of it, it probably will still be brutal...

Posted by: chrisfl | August 3, 2007 6:09 PM | Report abuse

The GOP and their propagandist lapdogs on the radio and tv will stop at nothing to smear their opponents. As long as Democrats realize that they should never, never take advice from their enemies, they'll do fine. SO, if Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, etc. have nothing else to do with their airtime then froth at the mouth over YearlyKos, then the Dems should simply do the opposite, attend and defend it like Clinton and Dodd have done. The right-wing, radical demagogues and their sheep will never support Dems, therefore they should either be ignored or called on their lies when necessary.

Posted by: joe baltimore | August 3, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

"The R's ...can't silence the Internet. Not yet, anyway, although they are trying."

'Wow, is this the kind of crap you wrote on the lib website drindl? Care to provide any evidence of this so called attempt to silence the internet? What a bunch of b.s. that is.'

I don't knw where to start... clearly you are not following the issue. it's complicated. Has to do with laws being proposed to allow carriers of INternet traffic---i.e. corporations, telecoms, etc. to charge fees based on usage.. which would effectively cripple grassroots bloggers.

I can look it up, but you have google too. I'm busy, try to find out yourself. Btw, a lot of rightwing bloggers were unhappy about it as well..

Posted by: drindl | August 3, 2007 5:58 PM | Report abuse

And this is unintentionally funny. According to Rasmussen, way-out, no-chance D candidate Kucinich trails by ONLY 14 points versus Guiliani and 9 points versus Thompson. That says a lot.

"The first Rasmussen Reports telephone survey gauging the general election appeal of Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D) finds him trailing the top GOP candidates for the presidency. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani leads Kucinich 48% to 34%. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson leads Kucinich 43% to 34%.
Given these choices, the number of voters who would prefer Some Other Candidate jumps to double digits. Thirteen percent (13%) select that option when Giuliani is the GOP candidate. Fourteen percent (14%) prefer a third option with Thompson matched against Kucinich. More voters are Not Sure whom to pick when considering a Kucinich-Thompson contest (9%) than when pondering Kucinich-v.-Giuliani (5%).

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | August 3, 2007 5:57 PM | Report abuse

"All day I've been tuning in to Hate Radio [ABC] off and on to hear the harpies attacking YeaarlyKos"

Drindl while they are preaching to the brainwashed, I'm surprised that O'Really et al are stupid enough to give them so much free publicity. I knew absolutely nothing about it until CC's blog entry today. If they elevate it into front page news Kos should send them a thank-you card. I'm reminded of the Dilbert line, "let's just pull on our ties until it hurts."

Geez, the news sounds good but I hope the D's don't blow it. Either now or later.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | August 3, 2007 5:51 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: David G. Ward | August 3, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Well, it's a little crazy to be predicting these massive gains so early. My hunch is the GOP will completely bail on Bush's Iraq war later this year and try to neutralize that as a campaign issue. Yes, that will drive the GOP base wild, but smart operatives are looking at the numbers and seeing that any party going into 2008 as the party of the Iraq war is going to get absolutely crushed. The question that remains, of course, is, "Is it too late?" The GOP is so thoroughly identified with this exceedingly unpopular (and incredibly ill-conceived and poorly managed) war, and voter intensity is so great, that nothing the party can do may avert a train wreck. But it's going to be an interesting ride, that's for sure.

Posted by: downthepike | August 3, 2007 5:26 PM | Report abuse

drindl calls it correctly! I haven't ben watching the right wing media, but the "mainstream" media appear to be taking over the job of twisting the meaning for them. The fact is, people are very angry right now and don't want business as usual. I am not sure just how dumb our political chattering classes are, but I have to assume they have survival instinct that will be kicking in about now. Republican's AND DEMOCRATS that do not stand for programs to help ordinary people are in big trouble. Universal health care, curbs on corporate excesses, sky high tax increases on corporations and the wealthy, "immigration reform" (meaning an end to illegal immigrants and an end to programs that bring in guest workers that replace American workers), taxes and fees and duties on outsourced goods and services to discourage this practice, and quite a few few other common sense things. With poison toys, toothpast, mouthwash, cold remedies, and prescription drugs from China and India being in the news, with the fraud about that sick joke of new border security computers (all of it being outsourced and written in India), with tires exploding and loosing treads, with industrial and military espionage from H1-B workers, with all of that being a daily feature in the news, I think the era of the "investors" and assorted similar swine, is just about over. There is a sea change taking place in this country and it is going to cost quite a few political hacks their jobs. I count about 72 memebers of Congress are going to loose their jobs. Whether those 72 are all Republican's, or if some Democrats wish to join them, will all depend on where they stand on these core issues.

Posted by: MikeB | August 3, 2007 5:24 PM | Report abuse

"The R's ...can't silence the Internet. Not yet, anyway, although they are trying."

Wow, is this the kind of crap you wrote on the lib website drindl? Care to provide any evidence of this so called attempt to silence the internet? What a bunch of b.s. that is.

You are creating one of your proverbial straw-man arguments that you libs like to accuse conservatives of doing so often; although I understand your strategy - it may succeed in persuading the rabid lib base, which won't take much.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | August 3, 2007 5:19 PM | Report abuse

All day I've been tuning in to Hate Radio [ABC] off and on to hear the harpies attacking YeaarlyKos. All of them so far, one rightwing shriekfest after another including Hannity, Ingraham, and Limbaugh, have attacked it relentlessly, mindlessly, viciously. and o'Reilly the Perpetual Hater himself.

All becuase a bunch of people who want to support their party in a hard-wrking, grassroots, populist kind of way, decide to have a get-together. But the rightwingers are terrified -- because these bloggers between them have a huge following. Even I had a website for a while, which had approximately 100,000 readers per day.

This is what scares them - the power to disseminate truth and ideas. The R's can control the corporate media, but they can't silence the Internet. Not yet, anyway, although they are trying.

Posted by: drindl | August 3, 2007 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Who's there? Care to do a piece on what kind of person would attend a 'YearlyKos' event?

Posted by: bsimon | August 3, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: Anonymous | August 3, 2007 4:18 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company